Trump, tax reform, and socialist Democrat leaders

johnwk2 · November 15, 2018, 3:09pm

As we near President Trump’s two-year mark in office, he certainly has overseen a number of positive accomplishments, e.g.: new unemployment claims are the lowest in decades; Hispanic and African-American unemployment is at the lowest rate ever recorded; youth unemployment is the lowest in nearly half a century; unemployment among those without a high school diploma hit an all-time low; not to mention over 3 million Americans have been lifted off food stamps since President Trump’s election. But when it comes to real tax reform, President Trump misses the mark!

On a federal level, the most odious form of taxation goes unnoticed by President Trump, and that tax ___ a federal tax which seizes the product of a working person’s labor ___ helps to trap our nation’s working poor on the Democrat Party Leadership’s government cheese plantation.

Let us not forget it was the Democrat Party Leadership which imposed “The Temporary Victory Tax” of 1943 which went beyond the limitations of the 16th Amendment and wrongly imposed an unconstitutional, un-apportioned, ”direct tax” upon a working person’s earned wage, as contradistinguished from the meaning of income within the 16th Amendment.

To this very day, our Supreme Court has repeatedly confirmed that federal “direct taxes” are still to be apportioned among the states, notwithstanding the 16th Amendment. See: Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S. 189, 206 (1920); BROMLEY VS MCCAUGHN, 280 U.S. 124 (1929), and more recently see what Justice Roberts stated in the Obama case: The shared responsibility payment is thus not a direct tax that must be apportioned among the several States.

It has be said that the “… patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property.” See BUTCHERS’ UNION CO. v. CRESCENT CITY CO., [1884]. Is there any question that the product of a working person’s labor is their property, and ought to be protected by the rule of apportionment as it does the wealthy’s property? See: Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S. 189,

“A proper regard for its genesis, as well as its very clear language, requires also that this amendment [Sixteenth Amendment] shall not be extended by loose construction, so as to repeal or modify, except as applied to income, those provisions of the Constitution that require an apportionment according to population for direct taxes upon property, real and personal. This limitation still has an appropriate and important function, and is not to be overridden by Congress or disregarded by the courts.”

If today’s socialist leaders like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, Stacey Abrams, Kyrsten Sinema, Nancy Pelosi, Andrew Gillum, etc., were really determined to help the working poor, rather than conning them for their vote to seize and keep power, they would be demanding an end to the “Temporary Victory Tax” of 1943 which now robs the bread that hard working people living in our nation’s inner cities earn from the sweat of their labor ___ an insidious tax designed by Democrat Leaders which helps to trap our nation’s working poor on the socialist’s leaders free cheese plantation by hindering them from accumulating wealth and financial independence.

Would it not be a blessing to our nation’s working poor for President Trump to call for an end to the Temporary Victory Tax of 1943, and replacing it with a temporary tax upon specifically chosen articles of luxury to make up the difference?

Of course, and better yet, repealing the 16th Amendment and forbidding Congress to lay and collect any tax calculated from profits, gains, interest, wages, salaries or other lawfully earned “incomes”, and returning to our Constitution’s original tax plan, would be the ultimate federal tax reform. It would end the failed experiment with the socialist/Marxist inspired tax calculated from incomes which has proven to inflame and agitate a never ending war between the rich and poor, the productive and nonproductive, and now empowers corrupted and thieving politicians in Washington who use this hideous tax to divide and conquer the American people while fattening the fortunes of their friends and the well connected.

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]

Samson_Corwell · November 16, 2018, 7:04am

johnwk2:

As we near President Trump’s two-year mark in office, he certainly has overseen a number of positive accomplishments, e.g.: new unemployment claims are the lowest in decades; Hispanic and African-American unemployment is at the lowest rate ever recorded; youth unemployment is the lowest in nearly half a century; unemployment among those without a high school diploma hit an all-time low; not to mention over 3 million Americans have been lifted off food stamps since President Trump’s election. But when it comes to real tax reform, President Trump misses the mark!

On a federal level, the most odious form of taxation goes unnoticed by President Trump, and that tax ___ a federal tax which seizes the product of a working person’s labor ___ helps to trap our nation’s working poor on the Democrat Party Leadership’s government cheese plantation.

Let us not forget it was the Democrat Party Leadership which imposed “The Temporary Victory Tax” of 1943 which went beyond the limitations of the 16th Amendment and wrongly imposed an unconstitutional, un-apportioned, ”direct tax” upon a working person’s earned wage, as contradistinguished from the meaning of income within the 16th Amendment.

To this very day, our Supreme Court has repeatedly confirmed that federal “direct taxes” are still to be apportioned among the states, notwithstanding the 16th Amendment. See: Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S. 189, 206 (1920); BROMLEY VS MCCAUGHN, 280 U.S. 124 (1929), and more recently see what Justice Roberts stated in the Obama case: The shared responsibility payment is thus not a direct tax that must be apportioned among the several States.

It has be said that the “… patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property.” See BUTCHERS’ UNION CO. v. CRESCENT CITY CO., [1884]. Is there any question that the product of a working person’s labor is their property, and ought to be protected by the rule of apportionment as it does the wealthy’s property? See: Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S. 189,

“A proper regard for its genesis, as well as its very clear language, requires also that this amendment [Sixteenth Amendment] shall not be extended by loose construction, so as to repeal or modify, except as applied to income, those provisions of the Constitution that require an apportionment according to population for direct taxes upon property, real and personal. This limitation still has an appropriate and important function, and is not to be overridden by Congress or disregarded by the courts.”

If today’s socialist leaders like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, Stacey Abrams, Kyrsten Sinema, Nancy Pelosi, Andrew Gillum, etc., were really determined to help the working poor, rather than conning them for their vote to seize and keep power, they would be demanding an end to the “Temporary Victory Tax” of 1943 which now robs the bread that hard working people living in our nation’s inner cities earn from the sweat of their labor ___ an insidious tax designed by Democrat Leaders which helps to trap our nation’s working poor on the socialist’s leaders free cheese plantation by hindering them from accumulating wealth and financial independence.

Would it not be a blessing to our nation’s working poor for President Trump to call for an end to the Temporary Victory Tax of 1943, and replacing it with a temporary tax upon specifically chosen articles of luxury to make up the difference?

Of course, and better yet, repealing the 16th Amendment and forbidding Congress to lay and collect any tax calculated from profits, gains, interest, wages, salaries or other lawfully earned “incomes”, and returning to our Constitution’s original tax plan, would be the ultimate federal tax reform. It would end the failed experiment with the socialist/Marxist inspired tax calculated from incomes which has proven to inflame and agitate a never ending war between the rich and poor, the productive and nonproductive, and now empowers corrupted and thieving politicians in Washington who use this hideous tax to divide and conquer the American people while fattening the fortunes of their friends and the well connected.

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]

Don’t ever stop posting, John. You are the most entertaining person here.

johnwk2 · November 17, 2018, 4:32pm

Well, I’m glad to see you find the posting of historical facts entertaining.

I wonder if those “college educated” voters, who have been brainwashed in college and now vote for democrat leaders, were introduced to facts rather than propaganda, if they still would vote for democrat leaders.

JWK

The unavoidable truth is, the Democrat Leadership’s socialist plan for “free” college tuition will be paid for by taxing millions of college graduates who worked for and paid their own way through college and are now trying to finance their own economic needs

mobulis · November 17, 2018, 5:36pm

The unavoidable truth is that wealth redistribution can help.

Rurudyne · November 17, 2018, 5:41pm

Wealth redostribution is not a delegated power given the federal government.

mobulis · November 17, 2018, 5:46pm

From wiki.

This article is about the post–World War II legislation. For the modern bill, see Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008.

The Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, also known as the G.I. Bill, was a law that provided a range of benefits for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as G.I.s). It was designed by the American Legion, who helped push it through Congress by mobilizing its chapters (along with the Veterans of Foreign Wars); the goal was to provide immediate rewards for practically all World War II veterans.

The act avoided the highly disputed postponed life insurance policy payout for World War I veterans that caused political turmoil for a decade and a half after that war.[1] Benefits included dedicated payments of tuition and living expenses to attend high school, college or vocational/technical school, low-cost mortgages, low-interest loans to start a business, as well as one year of unemployment compensation. It was available to all veterans who had been on active duty during the war years for at least 90 days and had not been dishonorably discharged—exposure to combat was not required.[2] The recipients did not pay any income tax on the G.I. benefits, since they were not considered earned income.[3]

By 1956, roughly 7.8 million veterans had used the G.I. Bill education benefits, some 2.2 million to attend colleges or universities and an additional 5.6 million for some kind of training program.[4]

Historians and economists judge the G.I. Bill a major political and economic success—especially in contrast to the treatments of World War I veterans—and a major contribution to America’s stock of human capital that encouraged long-term economic growth.[5][6][7]

Rurudyne · November 17, 2018, 6:13pm

You are apparently confusing benefits related to specific and lawful service with wealth redistribution as if the latter were in any way a delegated power given the federal government.

The former is a consequence of the federal, as an employer, to set terms and benefits for employment as is lawful for any employer to do so. Nothing more, nothing less. It has no bearing on what the federal may do beyond that consideration.

mobulis · November 17, 2018, 6:30pm

Nope it was wealth redistribution on a massive scale.

Rurudyne · November 17, 2018, 6:36pm

Immaterial.

The example you cite means nothing about if any other forms of wealth redistribution are lawful. Benefits associated with lawful emoplyment are not moving money around to people just because they are there.

Also, do you consider benefits associated with employment by other employers to be wealth redistribution?

mobulis · November 17, 2018, 6:57pm

What employment, they were discharged.

Rurudyne · November 17, 2018, 7:57pm

It related to their service. That Employment. Yeah, I would agree that it would have been inherently more lawful to have not done it after the fact for many. But it was tied to service even then.

But, once again, there is no delegated power given the federal for, well, progressivism.

It is all corrupt and lawless. From FDR till this very day.

mobulis · November 18, 2018, 2:42am

Sorry but reality dictates that things change.

Impenitent · November 18, 2018, 2:53am

history never repeats

1861

Rurudyne · November 18, 2018, 3:06pm

Reality is that the amendment process is the only lawful means of achieving that change.

Reality is that the Constitution was never amended to allow all that to be lawful.

Reality is that progressives love them some Arbitrary government.

Reality is people’s circumstances are not amendments to the Constitution.

Reality is you are very wrong.

mobulis · November 18, 2018, 4:36pm

Nope, interpretation plays a great role.

johnwk2 · November 18, 2018, 7:41pm

mobulis:

Rurudyne:

Wealth redostribution is not a delegated power given the federal government.

From wiki.

This article is about the post–World War II legislation. For the modern bill, see Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008.

The Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, also known as the G.I. Bill, was a law that provided a range of benefits for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as G.I.s). It was designed by the American Legion, who helped push it through Congress by mobilizing its chapters (along with the Veterans of Foreign Wars); the goal was to provide immediate rewards for practically all World War II veterans.

The act avoided the highly disputed postponed life insurance policy payout for World War I veterans that caused political turmoil for a decade and a half after that war.[1] Benefits included dedicated payments of tuition and living expenses to attend high school, college or vocational/technical school, low-cost mortgages, low-interest loans to start a business, as well as one year of unemployment compensation. It was available to all veterans who had been on active duty during the war years for at least 90 days and had not been dishonorably discharged—exposure to combat was not required.[2] The recipients did not pay any income tax on the G.I. benefits, since they were not considered earned income.[3]

By 1956, roughly 7.8 million veterans had used the G.I. Bill education benefits, some 2.2 million to attend colleges or universities and an additional 5.6 million for some kind of training program.[4]

Historians and economists judge the G.I. Bill a major political and economic success—especially in contrast to the treatments of World War I veterans—and a major contribution to America’s stock of human capital that encouraged long-term economic growth.[5][6][7]

The G.I. Bill is not a redistribution of wealth. It is a legitimate expenditure tied to Congress’s military powers listed beneath Article 1, Section, Section 8, Clause 1,:

“To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress . . . “

JWK

There is no surer way to weaken, destroy and subjugate a prosperous and freedom loving people than by importing the world’s poverty stricken and criminal populations into their country and making the country’s existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such an invasion.

mobulis · November 18, 2018, 8:11pm

johnwk2:

mobulis:

Rurudyne:

Wealth redostribution is not a delegated power given the federal government.

From wiki.

This article is about the post–World War II legislation. For the modern bill, see Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008.

The Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, also known as the G.I. Bill, was a law that provided a range of benefits for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as G.I.s). It was designed by the American Legion, who helped push it through Congress by mobilizing its chapters (along with the Veterans of Foreign Wars); the goal was to provide immediate rewards for practically all World War II veterans.

The act avoided the highly disputed postponed life insurance policy payout for World War I veterans that caused political turmoil for a decade and a half after that war.[1] Benefits included dedicated payments of tuition and living expenses to attend high school, college or vocational/technical school, low-cost mortgages, low-interest loans to start a business, as well as one year of unemployment compensation. It was available to all veterans who had been on active duty during the war years for at least 90 days and had not been dishonorably discharged—exposure to combat was not required.[2] The recipients did not pay any income tax on the G.I. benefits, since they were not considered earned income.[3]

By 1956, roughly 7.8 million veterans had used the G.I. Bill education benefits, some 2.2 million to attend colleges or universities and an additional 5.6 million for some kind of training program.[4]

Historians and economists judge the G.I. Bill a major political and economic success—especially in contrast to the treatments of World War I veterans—and a major contribution to America’s stock of human capital that encouraged long-term economic growth.[5][6][7]

The G.I. Bill is not a redistribution of wealth. It is a legitimate expenditure tied to Congress’s military powers listed beneath Article 1, Section, Section 8, Clause 1,:

“To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress . . . “

JWK

There is no surer way to weaken, destroy and subjugate a prosperous and freedom loving people than by importing the world’s poverty stricken and criminal populations into their country and making the country’s existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such an invasion.

Nope, its wealth redistribution.

Tguns · November 19, 2018, 12:45am

There you go, all you need to do is join the military, serve out your enlistment period honorably and you too can enjoy your fair share of wealth redistribution…problem solved.

mobulis · November 19, 2018, 9:03am

Nope…

johnwk2 · November 19, 2018, 12:02pm

mobulis:

johnwk2:

mobulis:

Rurudyne:

Wealth redostribution is not a delegated power given the federal government.

From wiki.

This article is about the post–World War II legislation. For the modern bill, see Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008.

The Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, also known as the G.I. Bill, was a law that provided a range of benefits for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as G.I.s). It was designed by the American Legion, who helped push it through Congress by mobilizing its chapters (along with the Veterans of Foreign Wars); the goal was to provide immediate rewards for practically all World War II veterans.

The act avoided the highly disputed postponed life insurance policy payout for World War I veterans that caused political turmoil for a decade and a half after that war.[1] Benefits included dedicated payments of tuition and living expenses to attend high school, college or vocational/technical school, low-cost mortgages, low-interest loans to start a business, as well as one year of unemployment compensation. It was available to all veterans who had been on active duty during the war years for at least 90 days and had not been dishonorably discharged—exposure to combat was not required.[2] The recipients did not pay any income tax on the G.I. benefits, since they were not considered earned income.[3]

By 1956, roughly 7.8 million veterans had used the G.I. Bill education benefits, some 2.2 million to attend colleges or universities and an additional 5.6 million for some kind of training program.[4]

Historians and economists judge the G.I. Bill a major political and economic success—especially in contrast to the treatments of World War I veterans—and a major contribution to America’s stock of human capital that encouraged long-term economic growth.[5][6][7]

The G.I. Bill is not a redistribution of wealth. It is a legitimate expenditure tied to Congress’s military powers listed beneath Article 1, Section, Section 8, Clause 1,:

“To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress . . . “

JWK

There is no surer way to weaken, destroy and subjugate a prosperous and freedom loving people than by importing the world’s poverty stricken and criminal populations into their country and making the country’s existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such an invasion.

Nope, its wealth redistribution.

JWK