>Yeah sure.....like that would ever work.
>
>Do yourself a favor, next time avoid the public school that gave you what they called an ‘education’.
Actually I was home-schooled. And it WOULD work if a) The Constitution was the Supreme Law of the Land, b) Government itself would be subject to the Constitution, and c) People MADE SURE that their Government was abiding by the Constitution instead of just lolling back and letting [for example] the USSC re-define what the Constitution says.
Take, for instance, the Keelo vs New London [2005, IIRC] decision by the USSC. In that decision the Supreme Court ruled that Imminent Domain applies to “intangible” benefits, namely projected taxation revenue increase, as being ‘public use.’ Furthermore, they ruled that using Imminent Domain to take private property and turn it over to another private entity (a form of Larceny) was legal so long as it was government-sanctioned.
If I got into my dislike of Congress’s latest Contra-Constitutional I’d probably end up getting the post pulled. However, here is a link to what they were doing the AIG tomfoolery: http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dv698tm_22dr6x3nfb
And the Executive, well... the DOJ’s dropping of the NBP case is just one of MANY outrages.
Yeah sure....the original Constitution before the 16th Amendment included two types of taxes 1) an indirect tax and a 2) direct tax with apportionment.
Both of the two taxes above were developed and based in a deep philosophy of fairness.
Your amendment proposal is at the bottom of the amateur league. To even consider such an idea means negating the entire thought development philosophy of the Founders with respect to taxation and fairness thereof. In particular your idea negates the second type of taxation , the direct tax, thereby rendering the United States incapable of emergency war funding or other large and essential public works projects such as the Panama Canal.
As for the Kelo decision and other ‘outrages’, yes they happen from time to time in American history, and they can be overturned. Such cases have nothing to do with your amendment proposal.
The Flat Tax has had time averaged support of between 3 - 6 members of Congress. The FairTax has had such support of between 45 and 75 members as well as Nobel Prize winners, former Federal Reserve Board Governors, respected academics and a huge grassroots organization that is growing by an average 800 person per day 24/7.
The Flat Tax is not new. It keeps coming up over and over again and indeed Congress has had 5 major reforms since 1913 to make the tax code ‘flatter’. Nothing can make it work, not even a Constitutional Amendment because just as soon as the need arises for ‘emergency’ war funding or other ‘emergencies’, such an amendment will be overturned. And if a provision for ‘emergency’ funding is included in such a farce amendment, then the word ‘emergency’ will be abused in meaning just as it has in many many states that have enacted spending restrictions except for ‘emergencies’.
Similar was the case of the 16th Amendment in which the word ‘income’ has been abused in meaning. The word has been sliced into various coded meanings of taxable income, non-taxable income, income that is not income but rather dividend distributions, income which is not earned income and so on and so on ad infinitum.
Since the last major tax reform in 1986 under President Reagan, there have been more than 18,000 amendments to the IRS tax code. As long as the Constitution has amendments with words such as ‘income’ or ‘emergency’ there will be lobbyists paying off members of Congress to define the words to their benefit.
Therefore, learn, realize and accept as a fact of life that abuse of meaning will always exist. And in the sense of an engineer, design your thinking and words for wear and tear, for maintenance, repair and replacement. The best ‘system’ will be a system that is TRANSPARENT, as a mechanic can easily see the problem, as a doctor can easily diagnose the illness. The Income tax in any form, even backed by Constitutional Amendment is a system where those in positions of power can ‘hide’ what they do from the public.
The best tax is a consumption tax with a provision that there is NO TAXATION ON ANY AMERICAN for the essentials of life where the essential level is well-defined and tested, and free of Congressional meddling. Such a level has already been developed as the ‘Poverty Line’. It could be abused but then everyone would see its effects and the tug-o-war that would ensue would check any abuse of it.
As for the natural check on taxation given by a consumption tax, the description was best given by Alexander Hamilton stated in Federalist Paper #21”:
“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. 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.”
The Founders got taxation right in the original Constitution before the 16th Amendment. The Income tax without apportionment took 52 years to become legal (1861 - 1913). It was snuck in as a small tax (7%) on the wealthiest 2% of Americans, and within 15 years it was foisted onto the middle class via incrementalism. It was based from the outset on class warfare.
Make your fellow homeschoolers proud, read and study: