Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Proposed Constitutional Amendment because Income is Not the Same as Wealth (Vanity)
vanity ^ | Jan. 29, 2012 | piytar

Posted on 01/29/2012 12:08:56 PM PST by piytar

Obama and other Democrats are constantly harping on taxing the "rich" or the "wealthy," but their proposals are all about taxing income. Well, income is not wealth, and the wealthy often have little income. The reality is that all income taxes do is punish the productive and job creators. Income taxes also are very useful for the wealthy and powerful to keep their club exclusive by making it nearly impossible for most people to become wealthy.

In other words, income taxes are class warfare by the mega-wealthy against the middle and upper middle class. They want to keep their club exclusive.

As a personal example, I just got a new job. Very good income. However, as a result of trying to create a small business and failing, I also have a lot of debt including tax debt. I will likely see about 15% of my income. The rest will be taxed away. But according to Obama and the Democrats, I'll be approachig "wealthy."

What's the solution? See below. This is a rough draft for discussion purposes, but I think it's a good idea.

OK, will don my flame retardant suit now...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: constitution; income; tax; wealth
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last
Whereas income taxes punish productivity;

Whereas the productive and job creators may have high incomes but little real wealth;

Whereas tax policy should encourage productivity and job creation;

Whereas the wealthy often have little income;

Whereas the wealthy often hold their wealth indirectly;

Whereas the general acquisition of wealth should not be punished but rather encouraged; and

Whereas the wealthiest should be incentivized to encourage the general acquisition of wealth;

The Constitution is hereby amended as follows:

Section 1: The Sixteenth Amendment is repealed.

Section 2: The federal government, all state governments, all city governments, all county governments, and all other political entities are forbidden from levying income taxes, as follows:

(a) The federal government, all state governments, all city governments, all county governments, and all other political entities are ordered to repeal any and all income taxes within one year after ratification of this Amendment. Failure to carry out this subsection by a political entity shall be a felony on the part of any and all members of the relevant government entity who voted or ordered against doing so or were responsible for doing so and failed to act. Such felony shall be punishable by no less than one year in a federal penitentiary.

(b) Any vote, order, or other official act by any member of the federal government, all state governments, all city governments, all county governments, and all other political entities to increase any income tax after ratification of this Amendment shall be a felony. Such felony shall be punishable by no less than five years in a federal penitentiary.

(c) Any vote, order, or other official act by any member of the federal government, all state governments, all city governments, all county governments, and all other political entities to levy any income tax after one year after the ratification of this Amendment shall be a felony. Such felony shall be punishable by no less than five years in a federal penitentiary.

Section 3: Wealth may be taxed as follows:

(a) Wealth shall be defined to include all cash, financial instruments, personal property, and real property anywhere in the world held directly by a natural person or indirectly such as through a trust for the benefit of a natural person.

(b) A natural person’s wealth shall be pro-rated according to the number of days the person resides in the United States each year.

(c) Each year, the Office of Management and Budget shall use reasonable means to estimate the median wealth of all natural persons residing in the United States at least part of the year.

(d) All wealth held by a natural person below than the greater of two hundred times the median wealth or US$50,000,000 shall be exempt from taxation federal government, all state governments, all city governments, all county governments, and all other political entities.

(e) All wealth held by a natural person above than the greater of two hundred times the median wealth or US$50,000,000 shall be taxable as determined by statute, rule, or regulation.

Whereby productivity and job creation are encourage, the general acquisition of wealth is encourage, and the wealthiest can increase the amount of their wealth exempt from taxation only by encouraging the general acquisition of wealth.

Thoughts?

1 posted on 01/29/2012 12:09:04 PM PST by piytar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: piytar
thoughts?

Moronic enough to qualify you as a candidate for 0bama's cabinet

2 posted on 01/29/2012 12:12:42 PM PST by from occupied ga (your own government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Here’s a simpler version, paraphrasing the 21st:

“The sixteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.”


3 posted on 01/29/2012 12:13:56 PM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar
Sheesh. Typos:

(d) All wealth held by a natural person below than the greater of two hundred times the median wealth or US$50,000,000 shall be exempt from taxation by the federal government, all state governments, all city governments, all county governments, and all other political entities.

(e) All wealth held by a natural person above than the greater of two hundred times the median wealth or US$50,000,000 shall be taxable as determined by statute, rule, or regulation.

By the way, I am enough of a realist to understand that the wealthy and powerful, esp the politically connected wealthy and powerful, would NEVER let this happen!

4 posted on 01/29/2012 12:15:08 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
Really? Why? Quit taxing income. But the government does need revenue. Tax the mega-wealthy on their wealth. But encourage them to raise the median wealth of the nation so they get to keep more of their own.

Maybe the specifics aren't good above, but what's "moronic" about the overall concept?

5 posted on 01/29/2012 12:17:09 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

I’m good with that, too. But the “mega-wealthy” keep tell us how they think more taxes are good, so let’s give them what they want, too!


6 posted on 01/29/2012 12:18:14 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

A tax on a person’s net (or gross) worth is a socialist’s redistributive wet dream. Kind of like property taxes paid on the assessed value of the land regardless of loans owed. Of course, a high dollar tax exemption would never float.


7 posted on 01/29/2012 12:21:10 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

I just don’t see how it’s more of a socialist’s wet dream than an income tax that destroys productivity and job creation while also protecting the politically connected mega-rich power brokers from most taxation.

This would hit John Kerry, Soros, et al, but leave the just “very wealthy” alone. Also, the mega-wealthy would be encourage to increase MEDIAN wealth so they could keep more of their own wealth.

The current system does not do any of that.


8 posted on 01/29/2012 12:25:29 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

Wealth or income should not be taxed at all, there are numerous other taxes that would keep the government running which is why it took so many years before an income tax was even considered.


9 posted on 01/29/2012 12:25:40 PM PST by ravenwolf (reIf you believe that Nero was the anti-Christ, and among othJust a bit of the long list of proofsre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: piytar

thoughts?

Your premise is wrong - rich people are not trying to keep others from becoming rich and have no incentive to do so. Here we are trying to wrest the Presidency from a marxist and we have one right here in our midst at Free Republic.


10 posted on 01/29/2012 12:29:20 PM PST by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ravenwolf
Wealth or income should not be taxed at all, there are numerous other taxes that would keep the government running which is why it took so many years before an income tax was even considered.

True enough.

Guess I'm just angry about the obscene income taxes, and I decided that if the mega-rich want to preach to us how our INCOME should be taxed because they feel guilty about being so WEALTHY, well, then let's take them at they're word and tax their mega-wealth. (They are lying, of course -- they want income taxed to keep their club exclusive.)

11 posted on 01/29/2012 12:29:20 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Maybe the specifics aren’t good above, but what’s “moronic” about the overall concept?


That concept is even more socialist than what we already have.


12 posted on 01/29/2012 12:29:48 PM PST by ravenwolf (reIf you believe that Nero was the anti-Christ, and among othJust a bit of the long list of proofsre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Ah, communism by any other name....

would smell the same.

Sorry, I’m afraid Kark Marx beat you to it by a good many decades.


13 posted on 01/29/2012 12:31:19 PM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Instead, reduce the size of government so that it doesn’t need so much tax revenue.


14 posted on 01/29/2012 12:32:18 PM PST by AZLiberty (No tag today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar
Wealth includes many things that are very difficult to value. copyrights, patents, formulas, mineral rights, property rights, goodwill, R&D, unrealized capital gains, etc. All of these items would have to be correctly priced annually to do taxes. Who would do the subjective pricing?
The only way to objectively value intangibles would be when they are converted to cash, which is the reason for income tax.
15 posted on 01/29/2012 12:33:05 PM PST by oldbrowser (They are Marxists, don't call them democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

“The sixteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.”


That makes more sense than anything else.


16 posted on 01/29/2012 12:33:09 PM PST by ravenwolf (reIf you believe that Nero was the anti-Christ, and among othJust a bit of the long list of proofsre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

I am NOT a marxist. Read it carefully. This would leave the vast majority of people alone and encourage the truly rich — the Kerry’s, Soros’s, Buffets, you know, the mega-wealthy who control our politics and who keep preaching how we need to pay “more of our fair share” in the form of income taxes that won’t touch them — to pony up. It’s also structured to build the general wealth of the nation as measured by the median wealth.

I really don’t see how that is marxist, esp compared to the current system of income taxes.


17 posted on 01/29/2012 12:34:34 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AZLiberty

“Instead, reduce the size of government so that it doesn’t need so much tax revenue.”

Yup.


18 posted on 01/29/2012 12:35:30 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser
Wealth includes many things that are very difficult to value. copyrights, patents, formulas, mineral rights, property rights, goodwill, R&D, unrealized capital gains, etc. All of these items would have to be correctly priced annually to do taxes.

And of course the politicians and their backers would use that to game the system. So we'd end up right back where we are at. Oh well.

19 posted on 01/29/2012 12:37:21 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Interesting thoughts. A few questions come to mind. How would wealth be calculated? Would the assessed value of a persons house be considered wealth or merely the current level of equity. In th latter case it would seem that the remainder of the wealth would be taxable for the seller or mortgage holder.

How would you account for fluctuations in assessed value in real property?

Similarly, If on December 31 your stock portfolio is worth $50 K, and the market crashes on January 2, you will be left with a tax debt on the previous wealth, not current wealth, and could be upside down simply relative to your tax bill..

Also, would you be repeatedly taxed on the same wealth?


20 posted on 01/29/2012 12:38:28 PM PST by newheart (What this country needs is a good dose of bran. Attack Muffins Unite!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar
OK, strike the idea. No, not because of those of you who spouted off about "socialist" or "marxist" -- but because the idea isn't workable and would be corrupted as surely as the current system is.

We DO need to get rid of the "progressive" -- actually punitive to the productive -- income tax, though...

21 posted on 01/29/2012 12:39:56 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar
I really don’t see how that is marxist, esp compared to the current system of income taxes.

I'll give you a hint

It’s also structured to build the general wealth of the nation as measured by the median wealth.

22 posted on 01/29/2012 12:40:17 PM PST by mountn man (Happiness is not a destination, its a way of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: piytar
but what's "moronic" about the overall concept?

Taxing wealth is the moronic idea. What a wonderful way to absolutely destroy any incentive to save. Give everyone's life savings to the governmentto redistribute to their friends. I only used the word "moronic" because the english language doesn't have a word adequate to express just how idiotic this idea is

23 posted on 01/29/2012 12:40:39 PM PST by from occupied ga (your own government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: piytar

I’m good with that, too. But the “mega-wealthy” keep tell us how they think more taxes are good, so let’s give them what they want, too!


The only problem is that it is only a very few wealthy that you here all of that b.s from, they are the rats who will support people like Obama just so they can also use the dumb socialist blankety, blank, blank.


24 posted on 01/29/2012 12:40:47 PM PST by ravenwolf (reIf you believe that Nero was the anti-Christ, and among othJust a bit of the long list of proofsre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: piytar
The government should be funded by tariffs and an NSRT. If you want to add a SSN payroll tax so be it just let it be voluntary.

If I were made to choose between a wealth/property tax and an income tax I would choose the former, as the later is ultra regressive.

25 posted on 01/29/2012 12:42:33 PM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

People with that kind of wealth can easily move to another country, which they’ll do, laughing all the way.

The State of Maryland had the brilliant idea to punish the rich also and imposed a millionaires’ tax. I suggest you research how that little experiment has been working out.


26 posted on 01/29/2012 12:46:20 PM PST by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Guess I’m just angry about the obscene income taxes, and I decided that if the mega-rich want to preach to us how our INCOME should be taxed because they feel guilty about being so WEALTHY, well, then let’s take them at they’re word and tax their mega-wealth. (They are lying, of course — they want income taxed to keep their club exclusive.)


I understand, as i had the same feeling when i heard that rich turd make that statement,too bad we can,t profile people like him and tax the hell out of them only.


27 posted on 01/29/2012 12:47:03 PM PST by ravenwolf (reIf you believe that Nero was the anti-Christ, and among othJust a bit of the long list of proofsre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: piytar
The left would love to tax wealth directly. Michael Moore has made the argument on more than one occasion that America isn't broke, just the government is broke, since the wealth owned by individuals dwarfs the government's debt. You can see where his argument is leading: let's get our hands on the rich people's wealth. It's a natural argument for someone like Moore to make since 1) it threatens basic constitutional ideas like the right to property, and 2) if implemented it would give the government a huge new confiscatory power. Leftists love giving government those kinds of powers. I think to a conservative it should be a bad idea almost on its face.
28 posted on 01/29/2012 12:49:50 PM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Except for Section 2, item (b), which is redundant with item (c), you were doing fine until Section 3, whereupon you flew off the rails.


29 posted on 01/29/2012 12:50:26 PM PST by Cyber Liberty ("If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." --Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

The day after this amendment is passed, every piece of property in the United States will get reevaluated to be worth $51,000,000.

If you took every penny of wealth from the richest 1% of the United States, you’d barely cover this year’s deficit. And that wealth won’t be there next year to tax away. The problem isn’t taxes, it’s the spending by the government. We’re presently spending 12% of the GDP on the national credit card - that’s unsustainable no matter what planet you’re on. You can’t tax your way out of it, you can only cut spending.

Liberals in both parties don’t want to cut the gravy train.


30 posted on 01/29/2012 12:50:42 PM PST by kingu (Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

That’s what the (huge) exemption is for and why that would be part of a hard to change Amendment.

But the overall point is decent.


31 posted on 01/29/2012 12:52:12 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: piytar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_tax

In 1999, Donald Trump proposed a once off 14.25% wealth tax on the net worth of individuals and trusts worth $10 million or more. Trump claimed that this would generate $5.7 trillion in new taxes, which could be used to eliminate the national debt.

Currently in place:
France, Switzerland, Netherlands, Norway, India, Liechtenstein

Abandoned by:
Austria, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Spain

Arguments against:
Brain Drain and Capital Flight
Arbitrary Valuation of Assets
High Management Costs


32 posted on 01/29/2012 12:55:07 PM PST by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mountn man

Um, common good in tersm of lots if individuals having a lot of wealth is the opposite of marixt “common good” in terms of gevernment redistributing (aka controlling for its own benefit) all the wealth.


33 posted on 01/29/2012 12:58:05 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

Thanks. OK, it’s a bad idea.


34 posted on 01/29/2012 1:00:33 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: piytar
The exemption would shrink like the income tax grew. If you need more evidnece of what an egregiously bad idea this is, Jessie Jackasson and Al Sharpton have been advocating a wealth tax for years.
35 posted on 01/29/2012 1:09:26 PM PST by from occupied ga (your own government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mountn man

To be clear despite my last response, I’ve admitted it is a bad idea.


36 posted on 01/29/2012 1:10:18 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

Admitted - but I want to keep Sections 1 and 2!


37 posted on 01/29/2012 1:12:16 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
If you need more evidnece of what an egregiously bad idea this is, Jessie Jackasson and Al Sharpton have been advocating a wealth tax for years.

No suprise here. It's a leftwinger's wet dream.

38 posted on 01/29/2012 1:22:18 PM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: piytar

You want government to confiscate private property simply because they are wealthy. That is marxist. You would have to confiscate a lot of property (that has already been taxed) for such a scheme. The fact that you even think of such a thing means you are not a conservative. If you really believe such crap then pitch it to Pelosi I am sure she would be interested.

No we should implement a flat tax where every person gets equal treatment under the law.


39 posted on 01/29/2012 1:29:01 PM PST by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Karl Marx would be proud!


40 posted on 01/29/2012 1:45:59 PM PST by Da Bilge Troll (Defeatism is not a winning strategy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

“In other words, income taxes are class warfare by the mega-wealthy against the middle and upper middle class. They want to keep their club exclusive.”

Eat the Rich!
Eat their seed capital!

BTW, did you notice that covetousness is listed on the list of things God hates...


41 posted on 01/29/2012 2:05:25 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Proud RINOmney Denialist since 2007!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

Yup. Bad idea. Freepers are good at shredding those.

Flat tax works for me.


42 posted on 01/29/2012 2:06:31 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: moder_ator

ZOT cleanup needed on Aisle 1!


43 posted on 01/29/2012 2:07:16 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Proud RINOmney Denialist since 2007!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Da Bilge Troll

What Marx and his ilk wouldn’t be proud of is that I admit it was a horrid idea. But I still want to keep sections 1 and 2!


44 posted on 01/29/2012 2:08:14 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

Yeah, it was a stinker of an idea...


45 posted on 01/29/2012 2:12:04 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: piytar
Very bad idea.

Getting rid of the income tax is sensible, but taxing wealth is not. Tax consumption -- a sales tax on consumer purchases. It would spur savings and capital formation and create spectacular growth.

46 posted on 01/29/2012 2:37:10 PM PST by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
“The sixteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed and no other provision of the Constitution shall be construed to permit the Congress to tax incomes.”

Make it abundantly clear, so even the Supreme Court can't get around it.

47 posted on 01/29/2012 3:03:51 PM PST by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: piytar

OK, I’m impressed that you realize it. That is a sign of maturity for anyone. Good job!


48 posted on 01/29/2012 3:41:59 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Proud RINOmney Denialist since 2007!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Yeah the idea needed some work. But we need people like you who are willing to make an effort to flesh out ideas and subject them to review. IMHO a lot of the responses you got were typical FR insults, but for those who prefer to actually think about the issues, yor are to be commended.


49 posted on 01/29/2012 8:39:57 PM PST by newheart (What this country needs is a good dose of bran. Attack Muffins Unite!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: newheart

Thank you, newheart. As a long term Freeper, I have pretty thick skin, but I truly appreciate what you said.


50 posted on 01/29/2012 8:43:14 PM PST by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson