Is it time to repeal the XVI Amendment (federal income tax)?

Redistribution of wealth has NEVER been a legitimate basis for taxation, EVER. Taxes are for one function, and one function only, and that is to provide for the minimal needs of government services to perform their functions. Fire, police etc require some form of revenue. They DO NOT require a system of social justice warriors who feel aggrieved that they aren't also billionaires. One of the seven sins is envy, and liberals are full of envy of every variety. Envy is not a rational basis for taxation.

 

Conservatives are tight-ass worshipers of the 1% and wish the hell that those less fortunate than themselves would just shut up , take what they are begrudgingly given and recognize their stations in life. The seven sins---?--pffft.

 

Worshippers of socialism expect everyone to be equally destitute, except for those who govern. Those historically have deprived, and killed, those who provide. Take as example the farmers whose grain was confiscated by the Russian army while they themselves starved to death on their own farms. That's what liberals are pushing for, and that Bernie Sanders wants when he pushes to make being a billionaire illegal.

Maybe we all need to take the Hunter Biden deduction, where you can earn millions from the Chinese, Ukrainians, Russians etc and pay no taxes for two year, and get a free pass. Think I might try that this next April 15th

 

Cognitive Dissonance, coach. Look it up.

Is capitalism using up the resources of the earth? Is it fair that most billionaires--millionaires and corporations don't pay anything close to their fair share of taxes? Are we all in this together or is it every man, woman and child on their own?

 

Navy Roberts (my dad is Hunter Biden)

Explain how that works when your name is Hunter Biden, and you just got off with millions from foreign enemy governments when you evaded taxes for two years. Two tiered justice doesn't pay taxes, and doesn't do time for criminal activities.

You also don't have to pay child support, or even acknowledge the existence of your love child. And the child's grandfather, Joe Biden, lies about how many grandchildren he has.

Liberalism is a crime.

 

------

 

"Liberals" are pushing for Stalinism? Bernie Sanders wants to take the farmers' grain away and let them starve? Really? Where do you get these wild ideas?
First of all, let's get our definitions straight. The original meaning ("classical" liberal) was similar to what we call libertarians today: a supporter of a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise. The root word comes from liberty--as in freedom of thought and expression and to make one's own choices about what to read, whom to have sex with, or control over one's body. In the U.S. by the twentieth century, liberals go the idea that in order to protect liberty for all, there also had to be a high degree of economic equality, which was threatened at the time by large industrial corporations suppressing workers' rights. So liberals in the U.S. came to favor government intervention to regulate the economy and promote equality. The contemporary American understanding of the term is that a liberal is someone who wants government to regulate the economy to promote equality, but to stay out of the bedroom and not regulate our bodies and minds. A conservative is someone who wants government to do the opposite. Think DeSantis.

In the sixties, hippies and yippies came to use the word "liberal" as a cuss word, cuz they thought liberals, although somewhat left of center, were too moderate.
"Progressive" became the preferred label for folks who wanted government to promote equality and tolerance of unconventional lifestyles at a faster pace. Despite what Retrumplicans might think, progressives are not necessarily socialists. Socialism, strictly speaking, calls for government ownership of the means of production and distribution of economic goods and services in a society. By that definition, even the Bern isn't a real socialist, although he thinks he is. He's a Social Democrat, great admirer of the Scandanvian system, which largely leaves the means of production and distribution in private hand, but taxes the hell out of people in the name of a social welfare state. That seems to be what the Bern and his followers are aiming act. But he wants to do it all democratically. (BTW, I'm not a fan, but I don't think he's a closet communist). I don't think taxing billionaires is quite the same as taxing peasants to the point of starvation. I doubt that the Bern wants to go too far with the leveling, since he's multimillionaire himself.

Then there's communism, or Marxism-Leninism, or "scientific socialism", which is the system you're equating with liberalism. Government power is used to establish and maintain a "dictatorship of the proletariat" which supposedly operates to advance the cause of the working class and to liquidate capitalism, after which there will theoretically be a transition to pure communism based on "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." So far we have plenty of example of "people's democracies" claiming to be doing that, but in practice they're totalitarian dictatorships run by and for an elite of party apparachiki , mostly subservient to a Dear Leader.

Retrumplican propagandists (like yourself?) would like to muddy the waters by lumping them together and saying that one leads inevitably to the other. There is no evidence of that. I, myself, tend to be a liberal in the modern sense-- somewhat left of center, but leery of progressive ideologues, unattracted to Socialists, and strongly opposed to any form of authoritarianism, be it communism, Trumpism, or DeSantism.

 

[QUOTE="Think this over, add your thoughts, and give this idea a hearing."[/QUOTE]

it's time for an end of government per se, and the rise of governance in actuality. the difference being no more centrified and localized government but instead decentralized and immediate support diversified privatized packages of legal means like amazon products able to be delivered anywhere in a day with adherences to decisions and people writing in support of their merit and the values of outcomes, sort of like the bitnation concept but more diverse and total.

federal income tax is a fraud. people pay for all kinds of shit that they don't need. chicken farmers pay for pork and beef and the others the others in turn. people hate socialization but in fact america is a socialist country where the everybody does pay as a co-op towards everybody else. it's a fucking deceptive joke. the reality is people could pay an land tax towards local cultural shared benefit. yes this is an extremely complex notion and would necessitate more attorneys and scholars than ever before. but there's enough people who want to be scholars at home and write from their computers. who would want to be emeritis and available anywhere quickly like uber drivers.... 'just nod if you can hear me....'

plusses - requires no revolution but merely adherence to decisions and outcomes like contracts. negatives - at first people will wholesale try to misinform and fight dirty. but voted and paid administrators of merit and scholarship and the votes of the peoples of earth through web interface would shake out over time. people will investigate cambridge solutions like fraudulent social misinformation programs and eventually the list of criminal code to punish misinformation will end such fraud.

 

...

 

its the wealthy who pay the bulk of taxes, not the least advantaged of society, what taxes do they pay?

Our obligations to the poor as stated by James is an individual obligation.

One does not gain grace by pulling a lever in an election, but in doing good works ones self.

The wealthy can take tax deductions for contributions to charities, thus depriving government of that revenue. Should those deductions be capped, thus yielding more revenue for Gvmt?

Do we count those donations in the flow of benefits to the least advantaged/

I am happy that Federal tax deductions for local real estate tax was capped in the previous administration. Please dont speak of income tax rates when such huge deductions are available to wealth.

 

Billionaires with good accountants pay little income tax, compared to the average schoolteacher or retail worker. Do the rich pay their fair share?
US super-rich 'pay almost no income tax'
Warren Buffet has admitted that he pays less income tax than his secretary.

Societies are composed of individuals. In modern representative democracies, we have some say in what our governments do. Do our moral obligations as individuals end before the ballot box? Pulling a lever in an election can be a good work or a bad work, depending on our choices.

No, I don't think that should happen, although I note that people with my income are incentivized to take the standard deduction instead of itemized charitable ones.

Of course. But what does that have to do with repealing a progressive income tax?

 

I'd like to see it repealed but likely? nah

 

The problem is how one defines fairness in taxes with a specific number.

 

Fairness is most certainly not those with a disproportionate share or wealth buying a government system and its rules and it’s tax code. Wonder why the less wealthy pay a higher proportion of their income in taxes?

 

The majority of federal taxes paid are generally those collected from the rich, as opposed to the bottom half of the American wage earner who pay no taxes at all. The top 5% of wage earners pay 20% of the total income tax collected. The 'tax the rich' zealots also fail to take into account that 'the rich' are the ones who employ others and open businesses, and the poor hire noone, nor do they typically open and/or operate any businesses. It makes no sense to 'wonder why the less wealthy pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes, since they typically don't pay any taxes.

 

Trickle on down---that always works. That's why the middle and lower classes have sooooo much money. Whomever has the most money--SHOULD PAY THE MOST IN TAXES , dummy.