Skip to comments.
Rep. King: ‘I’m For Abolishing the IRS and the Federal Income Tax Code’(Video)
CNSNews.com ^
| April 15, 2010
| Nicholas Ballasy
Posted on 04/16/2010 3:56:24 AM PDT by Man50D
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
Right on the Money Mr. King! It's time the federal income tax code and replace with a consumption, non VAT style tax!
1
posted on
04/16/2010 3:56:24 AM PDT
by
Man50D
To: Man50D; Taxman; Principled; EternalVigilance; phil_will1; kevkrom; Bigun; PeteB570; FBD; ...
Fair Tax ping!
2
posted on
04/16/2010 3:57:13 AM PDT
by
Man50D
(Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
To: Man50D
King for President!! He is talking language I can understand instead of RINOBABBLE.
To: Man50D
Awesome! Then institute your National Sales Tax!
No Way for Congress to hide their spending then! When people see how much money they have to spend every single day so that Congress can buy votes you will see REAL CHANGE IN WASHINGTON!
4
posted on
04/16/2010 4:01:27 AM PDT
by
Mad Dawgg
(If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the next one...)
To: Man50D
Ah, but is the IRS “too big to fail”?
The mere existence of the IRS is a full-employment program for its own employees, tax lawyers, and accountants.
To: Man50D
Steve King is a great man, but needs to forget the “national sales tax” nonsense. The Dems will be happy to pass that and blame you for it.
6
posted on
04/16/2010 4:05:41 AM PDT
by
iowamark
To: Man50D
No mention of repealing the 16th amendment. Dangerous omission.
7
posted on
04/16/2010 4:12:32 AM PDT
by
Wolfie
To: iowamark
Steve King is a great man, but needs to forget the national sales tax nonsense. The Dems will be happy to pass that and blame you for it.
King along with 65 other members of Congress cosponsor The Fair Tax because the growing grassroots movement have told them to do so or risk losing their jobs when they are up for re-election. The Fair Tax isn't going away. It's gaining momentum.
8
posted on
04/16/2010 4:15:47 AM PDT
by
Man50D
(Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
To: Wolfie
No mention of repealing the 16th amendment. Dangerous omission.
There is concurrent legislation before Congress to repeal the 16th Amendment (House Joint Resolution 16). Moreover the Fair Tax will defund the IRS. The IRS can't function without money and the 16th Amendment can't function without the IRS.
9
posted on
04/16/2010 4:18:21 AM PDT
by
Man50D
(Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
Comment #10 Removed by Moderator
To: Man50D
Yes!!!
Getting rid of the IRS would cause a surge in productivity and ultimately, wealth, in this country, not only because of the actual effect of restructuring Federal taxes, but because of the psychological boost. Right now in most people’s minds, it is like a giant vulture hovering over them, casting its shadow on everything as it waits to feed.
11
posted on
04/16/2010 4:22:03 AM PDT
by
livius
To: arbooz
To: Man50D
No mention of repealing the 16th amendment. Dangerous omission. There is concurrent legislation before Congress to repeal the 16th Amendment (House Joint Resolution 16). Moreover the Fair Tax will defund the IRS. The IRS can't function without money and the 16th Amendment can't function without the IRS.
In addition to repealing the 16th there needs to be an irrevocable rate cap and an absolute ban on congressional "tinkering" with the code.
The income tax was a flat 1.5% on roughly 1% of the population when it started -- Then Congress started "tinkering"
Actually I would be in favor of a clause that would reduce congressional pay every time they vote to spend on something. With the way they operate up there they'd be owing money by the time they adjourn on the first day.
13
posted on
04/16/2010 4:35:39 AM PDT
by
Cowman
(How can the IRS seize property without a warrant if the 4th amendment still stands?)
To: Cowman
In addition to repealing the 16th there needs to be an irrevocable rate cap and an absolute ban on congressional "tinkering" with the code.
People would know immediately if Congress tinkered with the rate for The Fair Tax since the rate will be transparent since it will be itemized on the receipt.
More importantly is the point founding father and first Secretary of The Treasury Alexander Hamilton made about a consumption tax in his Federalist Paper #21. To quote:
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. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that, "in political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four." If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds. This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of the power of imposing them.
Hamilton understood raising the rate too high will result in a decrease in purchases consequently reducing the amount of tax collected. Congress will then be forced to either lower the rate to once again maximize the amount of tax collected or reduce spending. Choosing the latter will focus attention on reducing the rate. A consumption tax shifts the power away from the government and back to the people. This concept dovetails with the limited government principles our founding fathers instilled in the Constitution.
14
posted on
04/16/2010 4:53:08 AM PDT
by
Man50D
(Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
To: Man50D
Tie the Fair Tax to ratification by the States of the new amendment that repeals the 16th (Fair Tax is law AFTER ratification), and I’m all for it.
15
posted on
04/16/2010 4:57:22 AM PDT
by
Wolfie
To: Wolfie
Tie the Fair Tax to ratification by the States of the new amendment that repeals the 16th (Fair Tax is law AFTER ratification), and Im all for it.
If by "tie" you mean group into one piece of legislation, then it can't be done. Repealing an amendment requires a different process than passing a bill. The former has to be approved by 3/4 of the state legislatures and 2/3 of the House and Senate. The latter requires only a majority.
There is a sunset provision that will eliminate The Fair Tax if the 16th Amendment is not repealed within seven years from the time The Fair Tax is enacted.
16
posted on
04/16/2010 5:07:35 AM PDT
by
Man50D
(Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
To: Man50D
One thing is certain ........... the system in place now doesn’t work.
17
posted on
04/16/2010 5:12:10 AM PDT
by
boycott
(CAL)
Comment #18 Removed by Moderator
To: Wolfie
“Tie the Fair Tax to ratification by the States of the new amendment that repeals the 16th (Fair Tax is law AFTER ratification), and Im all for it.”
I second this statement!
To: Man50D
20
posted on
04/16/2010 7:09:52 AM PDT
by
VRW Conspirator
(There is no such thing as a conservative democrat - Rinse - Repeat)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson