[ Blah, blah, blah, this is a serious issue. ]
Whether the givernment can tax or not is a straw-man argument..
The only ones to disagree would be anarchists..
meaning the issue IS NOT A SERIOUS ISSUE..
On the otherhand whether there should even BE A FEDERAL givernment could be a valid issue..
States can solve their problems just like countries do..
With allies and enemies and all that..
States send $100 to Washington get $10 back and $90 is almost totally wasted.. There may be another way..
On that we agree. ;)
I still think there are valid ways of financing governments besides taxation.
/johnny
The other way was tried and shown to be a disaster. States outside of a Union would have been the puppets and playthings of the great empires in the world at the time of the Founding. The unwillingness of states to provide the funds necessary to fight the War would have defeated the US but for the loans from France and the Netherlands which Hamilton’s genius found a way under the Constitution to repay. But it took the collapse of the government of the Confederation to convince the nation that a new Foundation was necessary.
Return to the concept of Federalism - no direct election of Senators specifically. Allow states to define their electorates.
The Senate was established to be like the House of Lords and Senators were appointed by state legislatures to look out for the interests of the states as states. It was also intended to be primarily concerned with long term National interests hence the longest terms, 6 yrs, of any of our elected officials.
The principle problems with our government stem from too much democracy.
Any belief that state governments could do better is only possible when the actual history of those governments is ignored or not known. It is not known to the mass of Americans.