Quote:
Originally Posted by robot_parade
I didn't know the definition of the word 'capitation', so I looked it up:
For fun, here's the text of the 16th Amendment:
Here we go.
'The Congress' - ie, the legislative branch, not the executive (president) or the judiciary (Supreme court and lower courts).
'shall have the power to lay and collect taxes' - OK! They can pass laws, subject to whatever restrictions are about to follow and any other constitutional restrictions, to lay and collect taxes. Good so far.
'on incomes' - aha! So an income tax, not a poll tax (or 'capitation' tax, if you prefer), or any other kind of tax. On income. Money I make.
'from whatever source derived' - Such as working and getting a salary. Or investing and getting dividends. Or inheriting money. Or by mowing someone's yard and getting paid for it. Or someone handing me money. Or finding money on the street. Or digging up buried treasure. Or selling something.
'without apportionment among the several States' - ok. So the tax go to the Feds, not the States.
'without regard to any census or enumeration.' - Again, making it clear that this isn't a poll tax, or based upon someone being counted by the government, or it some sort of government list or database. If I didn't have a birth certificate, or wasn't counted by the census, or wasn't notified by the government that I was supposed to pay taxes, I'm still responsible for paying them (if congress lays a tax on some income I make).
So, there in plain english is the law that allows congress to collect a federal income tax. One might try to quibble that 'the IRS' isn't the congress, but remember that the constitution also grants congress the right to raise an army...but noone expects to see congressmen going into battle (unfortunately). The IRS doesn't decide what the taxes will be, congress does. The IRS just oversees collection.
So, feel free to refute my interpretation, or admit your error. Unfortunately I've been on the Internet long enough to have high hopes for neither.
No one likes to pay taxes. However, we should recognize where they go. In the US, that means:
o The military.
o Medicare and Medicaid.
o Public education.
o Regulation (EPA, FDA, TLA, etc.)
o Law enforcement (FBI), intellegence (CIA), and homeland security.
o Various infrastructure projects in the states (roads, the interstate highway system, etc.
Let's pretend your fantasy is reality, and noone has to pay federal taxes. All of the above goes away. Effectively, we have no federal government, no 'U' in USA. 50 separate countries. How is that better than what we have now? Essentially we become like Europe, southeast Asia, South America, or Africa. Is that better than what we have now? Not really. Some of those countries are approximately equal to ours as far as standard of living goes. Most are worse. Some much worse. Citizens in all of them still have to pay taxes. Most of the countries with an approximately equal standard of living pay more taxes than we do. So what do you hope to achieve? Selfishly not pay taxes while the rest of us do? Achieve utopia, where you don't pay taxes, but recieve all the benefits?
|
Congressman George W. Fithian of Illinois declared: "An income tax places burdens upon accumulated wealth, where they can be most easily borne. It is right, because it exacts tribute of accumulation and not of endeavor. ...The artisan who goes forth to labor for his daily bread must pay upon the tools he works with; the brickmason upon his trowel, the carpenter upon his chisel and plane, the wood-chopper upon his ax, the miner upon his pick, and so on through all the list of wage-earners, yet none escape taxes upon what they eat and wear."
Congressman T. J. Hudson of Kansas declared: "an income tax will not touch a hair upon the head of a laboring man in the United States."
Mr. James C. Carter, an attorney, and a most respected member of the bar of New York, arguing before the Supreme Court of the United States for his client, Continental Trust Co., and for the governments' new income tax, 28 Stat. 509, 553, summed up the efforts of the lawmakers: "The view taken by the Congress which passed the tax law in question is plain on its face. The object was to redress in some degree the flagrant inequality by which the great mass of the people were made to furnish nearly all the revenue, and leave the very wealthy classes to furnish very little of it in comparison with their means. Of course, nothing, therefore, was to be taken from the wages of labor, or from very small incomes proceeding from other sources than labor."
The "income tax" was enacted to lighten the burden of taxation upon the working man. But there are those who not only pay a tax upon their tools, clothing, and etc., they also pay a tax that "was enacted to lighten the burden of taxation upon the working man", and further, they argue vehemently in favor of doing so, and want everyone else to pay it too.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
British Officer: "You don't think we're just going to walk out of India?"
Gandhi: "Yes. In the end, you will walk out, because 100,000 Englishmen simply cannot control 350,000,000 Indians if those Indians refuse to cooperate. And that is what we intend to achieve: peaceful, nonviolent, non-cooperation — till you, yourselves, see the wisdom of leaving"
-------------------------------------------------------------------
---------- Post added at 06:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:13 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by robot_parade
For fun, here's the text of the 16th Amendment:
Here we go.
'The Congress' - ie, the legislative branch, not the executive (president) or the judiciary (Supreme court and lower courts).
'shall have the power to lay and collect taxes' - OK! They can pass laws, subject to whatever restrictions are about to follow and any other constitutional restrictions, to lay and collect taxes. Good so far.
'on incomes' - aha! So an income tax, not a poll tax (or 'capitation' tax, if you prefer), or any other kind of tax. On income. Money I make.
'from whatever source derived' - Such as working and getting a salary. Or investing and getting dividends. Or inheriting money. Or by mowing someone's yard and getting paid for it. Or someone handing me money. Or finding money on the street. Or digging up buried treasure. Or selling something.
'without apportionment among the several States' - ok. So the tax go to the Feds, not the States.
'without regard to any census or enumeration.' - Again, making it clear that this isn't a poll tax, or based upon someone being counted by the government, or it some sort of government list or database. If I didn't have a birth certificate, or wasn't counted by the census, or wasn't notified by the government that I was supposed to pay taxes, I'm still responsible for paying them (if congress lays a tax on some income I make).
|
The Solicitor General for the government, in an amicus curiae brief, had made the argument: "The Sixteenth Amendment removed the restriction of apportionment as to such income taxes as before were subject thereto." The Court, in their opinion, in which there was no dissent, and noting this "confusion", declared this to be an "erroneous assumption" on the part of the government, and "wholly without foundation". The Court declared that "it was settled that the provisions of the Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new power of taxation"; and that the amendment simply prohibited the income tax from being taken from the category of indirect taxation, and being placed into the category of a direct tax.
It was also explained that the Congress of the United States had no intention of destroying the two great classes of taxation by the wording of the Sixteenth Amendment, but placed an income tax into the category of taxation in which it inherently belonged; the indirect class, or excise, and because the tax is not apportioned, nor subject to the census or enumeration, it is an excise tax, a tax upon the exercise of privileges, such taxes not being subject to the condition of apportionment to the States.