May 28, 2003

Income Taxation 101 and beyond ... the new frontier of discovery

A few days ago, Daniel at Reason of Voice had written a good post about the Morality of Tax Cuts. It was in response to Donald Sensing's article on One Hand Clapping. However, I am saving the link, because I think you might actually appreciate his thoughts better after reading mine.

I thought expound some of my thoughts about one issue: I believe Income Tax is the most onerous system ever of taxation. Think of it this way:

You have two choices: you work to provide for yourself or you do not work and live off the labors of others. It is as plain and simple as that. No one wants to work, really, at least not as much as they do. Most of us would work just hard enough to pay our bills and buy those few trinkets of luxury that are within our realm and tastes. That is what most of us do now. Only you have to work a bit longer or harder than you would have to if someone was not taking part of your check for taxes. Now, you actually just ceded additional parts of your time and labor to the government. You worked for the government's benefit; you worked for the government. Now did you do so voluntarily? Not likely. You did it because you had to do so, because the government passed laws forcing you to do so. The government enslaved you. You likely lived in a less affordable shack than you could have afforded if you had the full financial benefit of your labors. You might eat a bit more or better if you had better financial ability to do so. You might possibly be able to afford to get your teeth fixed or actually afford a dependable car if you actually received the hourly wage for your labors.

What if you just wanted to work hard enough to pay only a reasonable amount for housing, food and medical care and no more? I heard Ted Kaczynski actually lived on $400 a year. He likely has better quarters where he is now, eats better, and has better medical care. Is that the actual answer? Just find a cave, hunt squirrels and never shave, bathe or get a haircut? How can you cease to be a slave of the United States Government?

Income Tax has not always existed. Prior to the Income Tax, the U.S. Government existed on tariffs and trade. People existed, the U.S. had successfully defeated Spain, no one had invaded the United States. Then World War I came along, and it did cost a lot of money to support and supply an Army in a foreign country for four years. The U.S. Government had debts, huge debts. Most of these debts were to its own capitalists, the big money guys, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt and Carnegie. They were holding U.S. Bonds. Where were they ever going to get the money to pay off these bonds? Someone comes up with the bright idea of taking a percent of income.

Now exactly what is income? "Income" was traditionally thought to be that money which was a return on an investment: the supply of capital. It was not money that was received in exchange for labor or effort or time. It was money that was made off of allowing someone else use of your money. Interest, stock dividends, and other similar matters. The efforts of labor involve the payment of "wages."

Folklore has it that the original proposal was to take one-percent of the income of the Capitalists. No one complained at that, even the Capitalists. So, being as the Constitution of the United States did not provide the power to Congress to tax the Income of the people of the United States, a Constitutional Amendment was proposed. Some dispute whether it was ever effectively ratified, in accordance with legal provisions. But look at the words of the Amendment that was passed:

Amendment XVI.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Who in their right mind would believe that those words were ever believed by anyone to encompass the power to enslave the people of the United States that has subsequently occurred. Either the government has overstepped the power to tax that the people of the United States intended to give when they voted to ratify the Amendment, or our ancestors were more ignorant about things than I ever imagined was possible.

My position is that We, the People can vote to give the power, we can also vote to take it back. We did it before:

Amendment XVIII

Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

Section 2. The Congress and the several states shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several states, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the states by the Congress.

then

Amendment XXI

Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2. The transportation or importation into any state, territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several states, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the states by the Congress.

I say we do it again. But, if we do it, we also have to do a bit more deciding. How do we provide enough money for the government to do the job we ask it to do? I will save that discussion for another time, however, Donald Sensing did do a wonderful job of getting the questions we have to answer out in the open.

Posted by Tiger at May 28, 2003 09:52 PM
Comments