View Poll Results: Where does the power end?

Voters
12. You may not vote on this poll
  • Congress can now pass any law, so long as it's enforced only with taxation. Explain

    4 33.33%
  • Congress still has a limit on the laws they can pass. Explain

    8 66.67%
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 82

Thread: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

  1. #31
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,401

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    Fair taxation being everyone pay the same since they each have the same citizenship rights?

    or fair being each paying the same amount out of every dollar they have for the government?
    Fair being according to ABILITY to PAY as Thomas Jefferson envisioned. Notice his belief in the need to limit "inequality of property". This has been something we have understood since the beginning and the more we followed it the more prosperous we became. It is very unamerican to question the validity of progressive taxation, it has been so admired that it has been implemented in nearly every free country in the world.

    Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise.
    Last edited by iguanaman; 07-06-12 at 12:57 AM.

  2. #32
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    Uh you are wrong. How many times have lefties posted that swill that taxes are the cost of citizenship.
    Uh, taxes are the cost of citizenship. Unless you want to live in Somalia during the 90s. A citizen requires a state. A state requires at least the bare minimum of defense to ensure sovereignty. Therefore, to maintain citizenship, sovereignty must be ensured therefore requiring some level of taxes. Don't want citizenship? Don't have a state. Hence 1990s Somalia.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  3. #33
    Advisor
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 06:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    497

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    so you don't think a tax bill potentially three times higher would clause suffering?

    class envy is so pathetic
    You inspire many negative emotions, TD, but envy is not one of them. Your primary interjections against valid concerns over systemic flaws in the functioning of our country's economic machinery are belittling ad hominen attacks. Achieving envy (and/or any modicum of respect) requires accomplishments greater than sophomoric and pedestrian internet bluster.

  4. #34
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakryte View Post
    The court decided that people have a constitutional right to not buy a service, hence why they struck down the commerce clause argument. The right to associate or not associate with anyone is a constitutionally guaranteed right.

    Yet despite this, the court ruled that government could tax people simply for exercising their right to not associate with insurance companies and not buy a product. If Congress can tax people who exercise this right, then they can tax people who exercise their freedom of speech in a certain way. The precedent is set for future interpretation. The courts have ruled that the taxation powers of Congress supercede individual liberty.
    Actually, I think I will have to take some time to consider whether I agree with this. At first blush, I see your point. I would even possibly embellish your point by adding "... The thing that people are missing is that a simple tax is entirely different than a tax which penalizes. Congresses power to tax doesn't include the option of using taxation to penalize in order to do an end run around the commerce clause. A person contemplating the granting of the power to tax certainly wouldn't envision it as a way to undo limitations created by other parts of the Constitution. Such a notion would only be concocted after the fact."

    Still, it irks me that the Conservative justices have suddenly decided the Commerce clause limits the power of government. They certainly don't seem to think it provides much narrowness when it is a conservative law which is under scrutiny. It is the lack of sticking to principles that bothers me the most. Interpret the thing with one set of principles or the other, so that we clearly know when it needs to be changed and when it doesn't. I concede there has been activism on the liberal side, but the conservatives are no better. It is the inconsistency which is the fount of activism, and both sides do it.
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

  5. #35
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:10 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,091

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    You are more anti-ideology actually. That is why I qualified my statement with "such as it is." As for the psychological reasons behind the adoption and adoration of leftism, you would have to ask a professional. But I would guess that the leading causes would be envy, immaturity, and fear brought on by a lack of self esteem.
    Yes - I am quite anti-ideology.

    as to the rest ....You probably need a few more self help pop psychology books before you go analyzing people who you have met and only have been reading bits and pieces from for a few months. I understand Wayne Dyer is quite popular and that Dr. Phil fellow seems to have a following as well. Tony Robbins seems to strike a chord with some as well. Good hunting.
    Last edited by haymarket; 07-06-12 at 08:33 AM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  6. #36
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertzz View Post
    Taking this SCOTUS decision to an inevitable (IMO) next step, that could come from either party: eliminating our Bill or Rights.

    For example, given the recent ACA ruling, what would stop Congress from creating the following 'tax':

    "All citizens will have a 5% tax increase on their earned income. Likewise, if those citizens are not found to have spoken or written negatively about Barack Obama during the calendar year, they will receive a 5% tax credit"

    They aren't FORCIBLY taking away free speech. They're just taxing us and encouraging us how to speak to help prevent those taxes. They aren't FORCING us to buy Health Care. They're just encouraging us by giving us a tax break to a tax they just created.

    I don't believe it will get this far today; I believe the people have the intelligence enough today to stop it. But with each generation accepting these new 'rights' of our government, such laws become more likely. Today, they wouldn't think of passing an amendment to prohibit alcohol or any other substance. Once, Congress understood that it was beyond their power to force such a thing without granting themselves such power within the constitution.

    The 10th Amendment, IMO, is dead. Long live the King?
    Not anymore than the government already has.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #37
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,809

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Fair being according to ABILITY to PAY as Thomas Jefferson envisioned. Notice his belief in the need to limit "inequality of property". This has been something we have understood since the beginning and the more we followed it the more prosperous we became. It is very unamerican to question the validity of progressive taxation, it has been so admired that it has been implemented in nearly every free country in the world.
    quoting one guy who kept slaves and who did not incorporate a tax provision into the constitution is hardly proof. Why is ability to pay the fair reason? its the politically expedient position.

  8. #38
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,809

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Uh, taxes are the cost of citizenship. Unless you want to live in Somalia during the 90s. A citizen requires a state. A state requires at least the bare minimum of defense to ensure sovereignty. Therefore, to maintain citizenship, sovereignty must be ensured therefore requiring some level of taxes. Don't want citizenship? Don't have a state. Hence 1990s Somalia.
    tell that to the people who claim that many people shouldn't have to pay income taxes. not people like me who are paying the way for millions of others who are freeloaders

  9. #39
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,809

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by ChunkySalsa View Post
    You inspire many negative emotions, TD, but envy is not one of them. Your primary interjections against valid concerns over systemic flaws in the functioning of our country's economic machinery are belittling ad hominen attacks. Achieving envy (and/or any modicum of respect) requires accomplishments greater than sophomoric and pedestrian internet bluster.


    a lot of words to say absolutely nothing

  10. #40
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,809

    Re: Could taxation kill our Bill of Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    Actually, I think I will have to take some time to consider whether I agree with this. At first blush, I see your point. I would even possibly embellish your point by adding "... The thing that people are missing is that a simple tax is entirely different than a tax which penalizes. Congresses power to tax doesn't include the option of using taxation to penalize in order to do an end run around the commerce clause. A person contemplating the granting of the power to tax certainly wouldn't envision it as a way to undo limitations created by other parts of the Constitution. Such a notion would only be concocted after the fact."

    Still, it irks me that the Conservative justices have suddenly decided the Commerce clause limits the power of government. They certainly don't seem to think it provides much narrowness when it is a conservative law which is under scrutiny. It is the lack of sticking to principles that bothers me the most. Interpret the thing with one set of principles or the other, so that we clearly know when it needs to be changed and when it doesn't. I concede there has been activism on the liberal side, but the conservatives are no better. It is the inconsistency which is the fount of activism, and both sides do it.
    you approach it from the wrong side of the coin. The commerce clause was not intended to Limit the government


    the founders presumed a limited government that ONLY had the powers specifically delegated it. Thus the commerce clause's limitations were what powers the federal government WAS NOT GIVEN. The bill of rights specifically limited the federal government and many of the founders saw that as being superfluous

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •