Let's terminate our Washington Establishment welfare cartel which enslaves the people
I believe our federal government now spends approximately $950 Billion on “health-care” [Medicaid, CHIP, Medicare, and Obamacare subsidies]. I see nothing wrong with reducing federal taxes by that amount, leaving this money within the States, which in turn allows the States and people therein to deal with “health-care” as they individually see fit. Just imagine the enormous saving from doing this ___ no more federal bureaucracy employees who now get outrageous salaries and pensions which hard working American citizens are taxed to finance. We need to rid ourselves of this federal welfare parasitic Cartel which lives large on the American taxpayer’s hard earned wages.
JWK
Our Washington Establishment welfare cartel, which has enslaved the American People, needs to be terminated, and powers not granted to the federal government must be returned the states and people therein.
The rule of apportionment needs to be restored!
Judy,
We have been over this a number of times. The “fair tax” makes no attempt to withdraw from Congress’ power the ability to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other lawfully earned “income” as was upheld in Flint vs Stone Tracy.
Additionally, the “fair tax” does nothing to restore the protection of the rule of apportionment which was specifically agreed to to insure that each state’s representation would be based upon its population, and likewise insure each State’s Contribution in federal taxes would be apportioned, based upon its population size.
For a great article which explains why we need to restore the protection of apportionment see Congressional Seats and Federal Outlays.
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]