Tell me again how the graduated income tax is Constitutional?
By ParaTed2k
@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
October 28, 2009 1:31pm CST
Article 1: Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "
The graduated income tax system is not only bigoted, discriminatory and unfair, it is unconstitutional. How can anyone say that the system is uniform if people are taxed as different rates?
The graduated income tax is just another example of institutional bigotry and should never be tolerated by freedom loving people.
: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html
1 person likes this
3 responses
@rjl1989 (190)
•
29 Oct 09
I think by uniform it means the same rates everywhere, not the same rate for everyone. And its not referring to income taxes anyway.
If there was a flat tax rate, the distribution of income and wealth would be even more uneven than it already is. Many social problems would increase due to the increased levels of poverty. And arguably the reduction in the welfare of the poor would be much greater than the increase in welfare of the rich. Giving richer people even more money doesnt make them much happier, but taking money away from poor people really does affect them.
A flat rate of 10% would never cover all current government expenditure. A rate more like 25% might cover it.
I think all developed countries in the world have progressive income tax rates.
The USA already has the lowest levels of social mobility in the developed world. Do we really want a society where its very hard to become well off unless your parents are?
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
29 Oct 09
How does it not mean income taxes?
The graduated income tax is inherently bigoted and violates the U.S. Constitution. It can only be justified through preconceived notions and prejudging people in socio-economic classes.
How can we say everyone is considered equal under the law if we demand OTHERS pay more for that equality than anyone else?
It is blatant bigotry.
If you wouldn't demand that the government tax you at 50%, then it's hypocritical for you to demand others pay 50%.
I think you should be paying at least that amount! You can afford it!
@valentinesdiner (1214)
• United States
29 Oct 09
By bigoted you mean prejudiced against those making more money?
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
29 Oct 09
Yes. It is bigoted to prejudge people simply because they are in a different socio-economic class than ourselves. It is institutional bigotry to make them pay a higher tax rate simply because they make more.
You can't have class warfare without blatant hate.
@vikramtop1 (154)
• India
29 Oct 09
the income tax issue to simmer during 1870 and 1880s,but a number of influence converged to make it a reality n 1894.great fortune were amassed during the high prosperity and protectionism of the 1880.this focused attention back to the inequities of the tariff system during the election of democratic grover cleverland in 1892 - coupled with the popular and economic unrest resulating from the panic of 1893- a depression in which the stock market collasped thousands of business went bankrut,million of people were left jobless and nation income dropped ten percent .congress once again adopted an income tax as part of the tariff act 1894.although the rates were flat rather than graduated as in the civil war version the goal was more clearly to redress inequity than in the early experiment with income tax
@wlee9696 (595)
• United States
28 Oct 09
I agree that I don't think it is a constitutional way to tax people. I believe in a flat tax - 10% for everyone. Regardless of what you make it's 10% to the feds. No tax shelters, no loop holes, no anything just 10% of your income. That's a fair way of taxing people. Plus think how much smaller the IRS could be and how simple the IRS rules - either you paid your 10% or you didn't. Business should be the same - 10% flat rate. I think a flat tax is something both sides could agree on. Then the states could do a flat rate. That way everyone would know exactly what your income tax is and no one person or entity would pay a different amount.
