Thread: Rand Paul wants a constitutional convention convened!

Originally Posted by Judy

I am opposed to a Constitutional Convention over taxation. There may be an issue one day that warrants one, but balancing the budget isn't one of them. I think the better alternative is to elect 4 more US Senators from the Republican Party, pass the FairTax,

Judy,

The alleged fairtax ignores the rule of apportionment and would deny the people of those states who pay the lion’s share under the alleged fairtax their representation in Congress proportionately equal to their contribution. Our Constitution's fair share formula for any general tax among the states is:


States’ population

---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S SHARE

Total U.S. Population






The ringleaders behind the alleged fair tax are “progressivesâ€

Thousands of calls needed here! Please join in!

http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-1191534.html#1191534

To Johnwk,

You make some decent points as far as apportionment.

Still though thinking about fairtax I can see ways for it to work. First off yes it does like all taxes help to redistrubute wealth to a small degree. If you make more you usually spend more meaning your paying a higher tax through national sales tax. However statistics already show that the average top bracket income earner spends aprox 40% of their income. Those in the middle income bracket 85-90% of their income, and the poor virtually all of their income. So looking at it you put in with what you spend, you spend more you end up putting in more. Yet its not going to be bleeding the wealthy or rich dry by any means. They may end up overall paying a little more then now but the catch is we save buttloads from the IRS, audits, and related issues as well. It also makes it easier to also take on an import tax which is the next step in the system I believe. An upfront import tax on goods as they enter the country, using same system virtually but higher rate. Debatable on that though.

Howoever yes we'd need to look at representation by how much is put in but do we really think it works so great right now like it was meant to? For instance the average poor person making $20k- a month pays barely any tax after refunds and tax breaks (think tax breaks count as you'd think?). But to keep the idea can simply have county collection points that tally national sales tax. Your area pays more into it (counted at the buyers area not the sellers) you get higher representation... or so we'd hope but doubtful.

The apportionment doesn't work so well now anyways though. Pack 1,000 people in a block of low income poor people or have 1 rich man on that block paying the same amount. Hence an extra benefit to just poor people stack and breed to kill the apportionment for middle, upper, and rich class eventually. Plus say poor man #1 pays $500 in taxes a year, he then gets a special tax break (which we have tons of) that gives him that $500 back.... plus he gets a stimulus designed for the poor people of $250. So he pays $0 tax, gets a free $250 for being poor.... yet he counts as one who paid $500 in taxes.... that works great now doesn't it? Now shouldn't he actually cost his area -$250 in taxes paid towards the apportionment bit? Just a sloppy example but yah...

Originally Posted by ReformUSA2012

To Johnwk,

You make some decent points as far as apportionment.

Still though thinking about fairtax I can see ways for it to work. First off yes it does like all taxes help to redistrubute wealth to a small degree. If you make more you usually spend more meaning your paying a higher tax through national sales tax. However statistics already show that the average top bracket income earner spends aprox 40% of their income. Those in the middle income bracket …………

ReformUSA2012

You are not getting the point with regard to apportionment! It was specifically adopted to guarantee to the people of those states who contribute the lion’s share under any general tax among the States, would have a representation in Congress proportionately equal to their contribution. The idea put into different words would be Representation with proportional obligation!

Socialists, “progressivesâ€