Trump considers return to our Constitution’s original tax plan ending un-apportioned direct tax on earned wages

[tnt]

@Zippy

@Publius

And if they do, they can be voted out.

AFTER the damage has already been done.

How do you propose we change our system to avoid this dilema?

[Zippy]

@tnt

Sorry that history doesn’t agree with you.

What you are posting is narrative. Not history.

Not that I would expect a leftist to know the difference.

[Zippy]

@tnt

How do you propose we change our system to avoid this dilema?

Go back to the original constitutional legislature.

Part Time and Unpaid.

[Publius]

@Zippy

@Publius

And if they do, they can be voted out.

AFTER the damage has already been done.

You seem to think approval and ratification of a Constitutional amendment happens instantly, with no input from constituents. It’s okay.

[tnt]

@Zippy

@tnt

Sorry that history doesn’t agree with you.

What you are posting is narrative. Not history.

Not that I would expect a leftist to know the difference.

That’s actually what you are doing.

The US was collecting taxes from the people in the form of tariffs and excise taxes.

As the guilded age come crashing down, the politics of the day recognized the regressive nature of these taxes and a change was made to income tax.

But keep repeating what feels good to you. Let it all out…

[Zippy]

@Publius

You seem to think approval and ratification of a Constitutional amendment happens instantly, with no input from constituents

Exactly where did I say that.

But it’s cute that your worship of government leads you to blindly trust that elected officials are not acting in THEIR best interests.

Naive but cut all the same.

[tnt]

@Zippy

@tnt

How do you propose we change our system to avoid this dilema?

Go back to the original constitutional legislature.

Part Time and Unpaid.

Who do you think would take the job?

[Zippy]

@tnt

As the guilded age come crashing down, the politics of the day recognized the regressive nature of these taxes and a change was made to income tax.

Narrative right there as the very first income tax levied was a flat tax.

800 + - 3%

[johnwk2]

@Jezcoe

@johnwk2

I already explained how our Constitution’s original tax plan works in the OP. Stop making crap up.

We aren’t operating under the original tax plan.

And Trump is considering a proposal that would help return to our Constitution’s original tax plan, especially that part by which revenue is raised by taxing consumption and would prevent our Hollywood pinkos from escaping federal taxation as they now do under a so-called income tax, which is directed at, and robs, the bread working people earn by the sweat of their labor.

I’m still waiting for you to explain if you really believe a federal tax on a working person’s earned wage is not a direct tax as our founders understood the phrase.

[Jezcoe]

@johnwk2

@Jezcoe

@johnwk2

I already explained how our Constitution’s original tax plan works in the OP. Stop making crap up.

We aren’t operating under the original tax plan.

And Trump is considering a proposal that would help return to our Constitution’s original tax plan, especially that part by which revenue is raised by taxing consumption and would prevent our Hollywood pinkos from escaping federal taxation as they now do under a so-called income tax, which is directed at and now robs the bread working people earn by the sweat of their labor.

I’m still waiting for you to explain if you really believe a federal tax on a working person’s earned wage is not a direct tax as our founders understood the phrase.

Okay… then please tell us how it would actually work.

What is the tariff rate on $3.8 Trillion to fund everything? What percentage consumption tax needs to be levied to fill that gap?

Instead of quoting Hamilton… how about running some numbers. Make the case that it will benefit the average citizen.

[johnwk2]

@Jezcoe

@johnwk2

@Jezcoe

@johnwk2

I already explained how our Constitution’s original tax plan works in the OP. Stop making crap up.

We aren’t operating under the original tax plan.

And Trump is considering a proposal that would help return to our Constitution’s original tax plan, especially that part by which revenue is raised by taxing consumption and would prevent our Hollywood pinkos from escaping federal taxation as they now do under a so-called income tax, which is directed at and now robs the bread working people earn by the sweat of their labor.

I’m still waiting for you to explain if you really believe a federal tax on a working person’s earned wage is not a direct tax as our founders understood the phrase.

Okay… then please tell us how it would actually work.

What is the tariff rate on $3.8 Trillion to fund everything? What percentage consumption tax needs to be levied to fill that gap?

Instead of quoting Hamilton… how about running some numbers. Make the case that it will benefit the average citizen.

I already explained how our constitution’s original tax plan works in the OP. Numbers are unimportant and irrelevant in the explanation since the plan allows Congress to raise whatever amount is needed.

I’m still waiting for you to explain if you really believe a federal tax on a working person’s earned wage is not a direct tax as our founders understood the phrase.

[johnwk2]

@Publius

@johnwk2

@Jezcoe

@johnwk2

Those who support and defend our written Constitution,

The Constitution clearly allows for an Income tax.

The Constitution allows for a tax on incomes. It does not allow for any tax which takes the form of a direct tax, to not be apportioned, which I documented HERE

And, you still have not answered the question: Are you really suggesting a federal tax on a working person’s earned wage is not a direct tax as our founders understood the phrase?

If it will make you happy, I’ll answer. Yes.

And what documented quotations from our founders do you rely on to confirm your belief?

[Publius]

@Zippy

@tnt

How do you propose we change our system to avoid this dilema?

Go back to the original constitutional legislature.

Part Time and Unpaid.

Congress has never been unpaid.

[Zippy]

@Publius

Congress has never been unpaid.

6 dollars a day that they served started in 1789.

Before that all were unpaid. 1788-1789

[Jezcoe]

@johnwk2

Numbers are unimportant and irrelevant in the explanation

Numbers are of upmost importance. It shows how everything is going to be funded. And since in your proposal the budget has to be balanced and every year’s incurred debt must be paid off… what is the tax rate on goods to cover that?

Does that rate exceed the cost to the average taxpayer than the current system or is it a savings to the average taxpayer?

Do the cost effects of raising prices through consumption taxes and creating inflation make it worth the benefit of eliminating income tax?

That is the only way you are going to sell this.

Telling us what the founders thought was good is meaningless.

Sell me on it. Tell me how it will benefit me.

[johnwk2]

@Publius

@Zippy

@tnt

How do you propose we change our system to avoid this dilema?

Go back to the original constitutional legislature.

Part Time and Unpaid.

Congress has never been unpaid.

I have no problem with Zippy’s idea and paying them six dollars a day. Heck, we can even adjust for inflation.

[Zippy]

@johnwk2

I have no problem with Zippy’s idea

I would like to take credit but it was actually the author’s of the constitution who came up with the idea.

The mentally behind it is if legislators had to hold jobs and live in the areas they represent, they would be more in tune with the needs of their constituents.

[johnwk2]

@Jezcoe

@johnwk2

Numbers are unimportant and irrelevant in the explanation

Numbers are of upmost importance.

The only number which is relevant is how much Congress wants to spend. Our original tax plan allows Congress to raise whatever amount is needed. Once Congress determines how much it wants to spend, it then determines how to raise that money from imposts, duties and internal excise taxes.

I’m still waiting for you to explain if you really believe a federal tax on a working person’s earned wage is not a direct tax as our founders understood the phrase.

[Jezcoe]

@johnwk2

The only number which is relevant is how much Congress wants to spend.

Social Security and Medicare cost around $2 Trillion a year.

We import $3.8 Trillion of goods.

What is the necessary tax on imports and domestic goods to fund just these two programs?

I know why you don’t want to talk actual numbers… because platitudes are easy… actually showing why it is better for the average person is really hard.

[johnwk2]

@Zippy

@johnwk2

I have no problem with Zippy’s idea

I would like to take credit but it was actually the author’s of the constitution who came up with the idea.

The mentally behind it is if legislators had to hold jobs and live in the areas they represent, they would be more in tune with the needs of their constituents.

And, if not in tune, they would immediately face the consequences . . .

AOC heckled, booed at NYC town hall