[JOHN W K]

Well then, where do we disagree in what I posted in this thread? It would help if you simply stated your disagreement[s] in clear language and quoted a complete sentence and thought of mine. I know when I first involved myself in the tax issue, over twenty years ago, my thinking was very, very muddled, but the advantage I had was a desire to learn the truth, and so, I eventually arrived at the founding of our nation and its founding documents . I know you love to post documentation, which I do appreciate, as I too am always eager to offer documentation to those who may disagree with what I write . But in the current situation, I am unable to understand your particular disagreements, if any, because they have not been stated clearly. I have always submitted to and accepted a preponderance of evidence with regard to the intent of our Constitution as contemplated by those who framed it and the people who adopted it, and would sincerely like to correct any inaccuracies I may have, or, correct any wording I have posted which is not factually correct. So, at this point in time I simply need to know, in clear and simple language what your specific disagreements are. I do not need documentation at this point in time, and will only need it if I disagree with you.


JWK

[ancient_geezer]

It is apparent that we agree on facts.

An appropriate position rooted in facts may be taken:

Thomas Hobbes from Leviathan

• It is fairer to tax people on what they extract from the economy, as roughly measured by their consumption, than to tax them on what they produce for the economy, as roughly measured by their income.

Federalist #12:

• "It is evident from the state of the country, from the habits of the people, from the experience we have had on the point itself, that it is impracticable to raise any very considerable sums by direct taxation."

• "The ability of a country to pay taxes must always be proportioned, in a great degree, to the quantity of money in circulation, and to the celerity with which it circulates. Commerce, contributing to both these objects, must of necessity render the payment of taxes easier, and facilitate the requisite supplies to the treasury."

Federalist #31:

"As theory and practice conspire to prove that the power of procuring revenue is unavailing when exercised over the States in their collective capacities, the federal government must of necessity be invested with an unqualified power of taxation in the ordinary modes. "

Federalist #21:

• "The principle of regulating the contributions of the States to the common treasury by QUOTAS is another fundamental error in the Confederation. Its repugnancy to an adequate supply of the national exigencies has been already pointed out, and has sufficiently appeared from the trial which has been made of it. I speak of it now solely with a view to equality among the States. Those who have been accustomed to contemplate the circumstances which produce and constitute national wealth, must be satisfied that there is no common standard or barometer by which the degrees of it can be ascertained. Neither the value of lands, nor the numbers of the people, which have been successively proposed as the rule of State contributions, has any pretension to being a just representative. "

• "It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption, that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit; which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue. ... Impositions of this kind usually fall under the denomination of indirect taxes, and must for a long time constitute the chief part of the revenue raised in this country.

  Those of the direct kind, which principally relate to land and buildings, may admit of a rule of apportionment."

 

That is sufficient.