Thread: FairTax and Trade

And I guess you still haven't learned how the income tax rewards illegal aliens and foreign producers. Wow.

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by johnwk

Judy,

I’m beginning to understand the mental block you have in judging the merits of a tax. You fail to identify the characteristics of the tax and how it operates on individuals, and focus only on the name of a tax. Repealing the Corporate Excise of 1909 and replacing it with the corporate income tax in 1913 does nothing to change the characteristics of the tax. In each case the tax is calculated from profits, gains and other incomes and the name of the tax is irrelevant in its operation. Is this really that difficult for you to understand?

Your above assertion, that the “FairTax repeals the federal corporate income tax and all other federal income based taxes that are part of the Internal Revenue Act of 1986” is meaningless and an intentional attempt to delude if the characteristics of an income based tax are still available to Congress under the alleged “FairTax”, which is the case.

Additionally, the alleged “FairTax”, when applied to ordinary working people, such as Mary and Joe Sixpack who sell the property each has in their own labor to finance their economic needs, turns out to directly tax an inalienable right of mankind in addition to operating as an income based tax, as the tax to be paid is calculated from money received from the sale of their labor.

Our founders fully understood the notoriously oppressive nature of direct taxation, and that is why they specifically commanded in our Constitution that “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Our Founders intended that if direct taxation were ever to be used, and levied directly upon individuals by our federal government, as the alleged “FairTax” does, it would turn out to be an equal per capita tax and every tax payer would pay an equal amount of tax, which is not the case under the alleged fairtax.

JWK


If, by calling a tax indirect when it is essentially direct, the rule of protection could be frittered away, one of the great landmarks defining the boundary between the nation and the states of which it is composed, would have disappeared, and with it one of the bulwarks of private rights and private property. POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 157 U.S. 429 (1895)

LOL!! I don't care, Johnwk. My objective is to repeal the existing income-based taxes that people pay

Well, the alleged fairtax does not end an income based tax for Mary and Joe Sixpack as outlined above.


JWK




There is no better way to weaken, destroy and subjugate a prosperous and freedom loving country than by importing the world’s poverty stricken populations into that country.

Well .... I don't care. It's not coming out of their pocket, income or share, they're just collecting a tax for the government and being paid a nice fee for their service. If they don't care enough about our country to do that little thing to help fix our country while they make money from the result, screw 'em, they're too stupid and selfish to worry about.

Originally Posted by Judy

Well .... I don't care. It's not coming out of their pocket or share, they're just collecting it for the government and being paid a fee for their service. If they don't care enough about our country to do that little thing to help fix our country while they make money from the result, screw 'em, they're too stupid and selfish to worry about.

Are you finally admitting the alleged fairtax does not end an income based tax?


JWK





Our civil rights ought not be based upon the perverted desires of sexual deviants who now impinge upon the inalienable right of mankind being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

No, I am not. If you want to call a sales tax an income tax, I don't care. Call it whatever you want.

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by johnwk

Well, the alleged fairtax does not end an income based tax for Mary and Joe Sixpack as outlined above.


JWK




There is no better way to weaken, destroy and subjugate a prosperous and freedom loving country than by importing the world’s poverty stricken populations into that country.

Well .... I don't care. It's not coming out of their pocket, income or share, they're just collecting a tax for the government and being paid a nice fee for their service. If they don't care enough about our country to do that little thing to help fix our country while they make money from the result, screw 'em, they're too stupid and selfish to worry about.

So, now you want to command and compel Mary and Joe Sixpack to become tax collectors for government? Where in the Constitution has that power been granted to our federal government. And, by what constitutional provision has Congress authority to directly tax the sale of property which Mary and Joe have in their own labor?


JWK


If, by calling a tax indirect when it is essentially direct, the rule of protection could be frittered away, one of the great landmarks defining the boundary between the nation and the states of which it is composed, would have disappeared, and with it one of the bulwarks of private rights and private property. POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 157 U.S. 429 (1895)

Originally Posted by johnwk

So, now you want to command and compel Mary and Joe Sixpack to become tax collectors for government? Where in the Constitution has that power been granted to our federal government. And, by what constitutional provision has Congress authority to directly tax the sale of property which Mary and Joe have in their own labor?


JWK


If, by calling a tax indirect when it is essentially direct, the rule of protection could be frittered away, one of the great landmarks defining the boundary between the nation and the states of which it is composed, would have disappeared, and with it one of the bulwarks of private rights and private property. POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 157 U.S. 429 (1895)

Yep, I have absolutely no problem at all "commanding" retail vendors to collect a national sales tax for the government. If they don't like it, they can go get a job and they won't have to be commanded to do anything.

It's no longer their labor when they sell it, it's the buyers who bought it and pay the tax on it.

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by johnwk

Are you finally admitting the alleged fairtax does not end an income based tax?


JWK





Our civil rights ought not be based upon the perverted desires of sexual deviants who now impinge upon the inalienable right of mankind being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

No, I am not. If you want to call a sales tax an income tax, I don't care. Call it whatever you want.

Judy, we already went over this. The name of a tax is irrelevant. I wrote to you:

I’m beginning to understand the mental block you have in judging the merits of a tax. You fail to identify the characteristics of the tax and how it operates on individuals, and focus only on the name of a tax. Repealing the Corporate Excise of 1909 and replacing it with the corporate income tax in 1913 does nothing to change the characteristics of the tax. In each case the tax is calculated from profits, gains and other incomes and the name of the tax is irrelevant in its operation. Is this really that difficult for you to understand?

Your above assertion, that the “FairTax repeals the federal corporate income tax and all other federal income based taxes that are part of the Internal Revenue Act of 1986” is meaningless and an intentional attempt to delude if the characteristics of an income based tax are still available to Congress under the alleged “FairTax”, which is the case.

Additionally, the alleged “FairTax”, when applied to ordinary working people, such as Mary and Joe Sixpack who sell the property each has in their own labor to finance their economic needs, turns out to directly tax an inalienable right of mankind in addition to operating as an income based tax, as the tax to be paid is calculated from money received from the sale of their labor.

Our founders fully understood the notoriously oppressive nature of direct taxation, and that is why they specifically commanded in our Constitution that “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Our Founders intended that if direct taxation were ever to be used, and levied directly upon individuals by our federal government, as the alleged “FairTax” does, it would turn out to be an equal per capita tax and every tax payer would pay an equal amount of tax, which is not the case under the alleged fairtax.


The fact is, Judy, the alleged fairtax does not end an income based tax for Mary and Joe Sixpack as outlined above. I thought you wanted to end income based taxes.


JWK

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by johnwk

So, now you want to command and compel Mary and Joe Sixpack to become tax collectors for government? Where in the Constitution has that power been granted to our federal government. And, by what constitutional provision has Congress authority to directly tax the sale of property which Mary and Joe have in their own labor?


JWK


If, by calling a tax indirect when it is essentially direct, the rule of protection could be frittered away, one of the great landmarks defining the boundary between the nation and the states of which it is composed, would have disappeared, and with it one of the bulwarks of private rights and private property. POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 157 U.S. 429 (1895)

Yep, I have absolutely no problem at all "commanding" retail vendors to collect a national sales tax for the government. If they don't like it, they can go get a job and they won't have to be commanded to do anything.

It's no long their labor when they sell it, it's the buyers who bought it and pay the tax on it.

Judy, you never answered the question: by what constitutional provision has Congress authority to directly tax [without apportioning the tax] the sale of property which Mary and Joe have in their own labor?


JWK

Originally Posted by johnwk

Judy, we already went over this. The name of a tax is irrelevant. I wrote to you:

I’m beginning to understand the mental block you have in judging the merits of a tax. You fail to identify the characteristics of the tax and how it operates on individuals, and focus only on the name of a tax. Repealing the Corporate Excise of 1909 and replacing it with the corporate income tax in 1913 does nothing to change the characteristics of the tax. In each case the tax is calculated from profits, gains and other incomes and the name of the tax is irrelevant in its operation. Is this really that difficult for you to understand?

Your above assertion, that the “FairTax repeals the federal corporate income tax and all other federal income based taxes that are part of the Internal Revenue Act of 1986” is meaningless and an intentional attempt to delude if the characteristics of an income based tax are still available to Congress under the alleged “FairTax”, which is the case.

Additionally, the alleged “FairTax”, when applied to ordinary working people, such as Mary and Joe Sixpack who sell the property each has in their own labor to finance their economic needs, turns out to directly tax an inalienable right of mankind in addition to operating as an income based tax, as the tax to be paid is calculated from money received from the sale of their labor.

Our founders fully understood the notoriously oppressive nature of direct taxation, and that is why they specifically commanded in our Constitution that “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Our Founders intended that if direct taxation were ever to be used, and levied directly upon individuals by our federal government, as the alleged “FairTax” does, it would turn out to be an equal per capita tax and every tax payer would pay an equal amount of tax, which is not the case under the alleged fairtax.


The fact is, Judy, the alleged fairtax does not end an income based tax for Mary and Joe Sixpack as outlined above. I thought you wanted to end income based taxes.


JWK

Let me put it this way, everything the FairTax ends, starts and continues, I support. Are you clear now?