- With all due respect. The "American public" has no idea of concern with what the 14thA means. Don't agree, strike this conversation up with a dozen folks (who aren't lawyers) and tell me how that goes for you. I'd venture potential new TP members looking at this must be put off by it.I had a very good friend (and active local tea party leader) of mine jerk a knot in my tie on a constitutional issue near and dear to me (abuse of the commerce clause). In so many words he said, I get it, the courts, congress and the president make stuff up, move on. How do we increase our membership to the point we are taken seriously?Priorities gentlemen, IMHO that is the question. We can not fight let alone win if we have no army. Again no disrespect just a different point of view.
- Permalink Reply by on
- See even the TP is now seeking POWER over principle which will destroy the concept of independent TP groups seeking a return to the small constitutional government - I would have pulled a hard knot in his tie. he sounds like some of the site owners are now on TV speaking for the TPP - I do not think he or she speaks for me - how about you?
- Permalink Reply by on
- Lock,My friend I think you may have misunderstood my point. I should have been more thorough, I apologize. Please allow me a second attempt.From my personal perspective I find this citizenship debate interesting and I’m learning a thing or two. I am frustrated with it because I don’t believe currently uninvolved American’s give a rats butt about it. They should but they don’t IMO. Hellraiser said:“…Nothing will happen if we don't prove to the American public that the wording of the 14th allows for an anchor baby to become president.”I’m trying to learn things I can use to motivate people to get involved, not to motivate the already motivated over to my point of view.The reference to my (really good) friend is of the same spirit. We started a local TP (about 80 people). Our focus as leaders became two fold; collect information and provide it to the group so they could draw their own conclusions; grow the group so our local politicians would take us seriously.Initially I tried to bring some of these shall we say more complicated perspectives too the group. It confounded most of them and at the end of the day they were more interested in what the local school board was doing than anything else. I learned to respect that.My co-leader simply reminded me of that point and that with 80 members we need to grow the head count more than anything.I apologize to the group for venting frustration. I am desperately trying to learn what I can as fast as I can to help the cause. It drives me a little nuts to see people who I think know what they are talking not trying to refine what they know down to where us mere mortals can understand what they are talking about.This makes me think about Ben Franklin who in his day understood the situation on the ground and came up with a simple phrase that got everyone’s attention.Join or Die!The colonists understood they're situation on the ground what this meant phrase mean't, it didn’t require explanation.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Jon,If the people do not care enough to learn and to understand the principles of the Conservative small government that leave the decisions to that government which is closest to the people.IMO the school district should drive the city government which should drive the county government which should drive the State government and the 50 States should drive the Federal government. The structure of government should IMO start at the bottom with the PEOPLE and move up - not from the top down through many layers of unneeded rules and regulations that are costly and not need in many communities.In other words what goes up should stay there not be poured back on the people with huge expense attached.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Why does the Congress need a balanced budget amendment if they are going to limited to spending only on Article I section 8 clauses 1 - 18 items? Most of the current budget of 20+% of GDP is spent on non Article I items. Only Defense and postal highways, water ways and a few other items. So why do we 18% of last years GDP - did you think this through?I agree that all need to pay a flat tax rich man, beggar man - thief, all must contribute and have skin in the game. I disagree about business taxes as it gives the Congress a hidden tax to play with. The people do understand that there are hidden taxes and a business that makes 8% net profit before taxes pays a big percentage of profit and it will be passed on in the price of the product as costs must be recognized and they are part and parcel of the desired return on investment.Tax reform that conforms to the Constitution is not easy to get in place for many Federal services must be sent to the States with the money from the current 16th amendment funds until the new amendments can be ratified.
- Permalink Reply by on
- We will never get to Artile 1 Section 8 spending - just being realistic. It is a target only IMO.The 18% is Maximum Budget allowed. No more, but could be less. If revenues dont meet spending, the spending gets cut. Balanced. No new debt. I am tired of the argument that we dont need to control Congress spending, they should just do thier job. The have shown conclusively they WILL NOT. Imagine politicians bargaining for votes based on how low they think the % should be instead of todays bs.You must be misunderstanding my tax plan for both business and individuals, as I did not add that those percentages would be maximum allowed. Nothing to play with except LESS of a percentage. The hidden taxes we pay are excise, use type fees - like add-ons to utility bills. Those need to be eliminated IMO. My proposal deletes the notion of taxing profit. All the games played to spend on favored expeses by the tax code to get a lower net before taxation -gone. Better for business.We tax revenue so it cant be buried in pricing and passed on to consumers. Ideally it would be paired to a flat unchangeable national sales tax at the consumer level only - no exceptions, rather than an individual income tax (repeal 16thA).So, the only federal taxes would be on consumption at retail, and a transaction flat percentage tax on business revenue, and tarriffs.The percentage of GDP limit of spending is a built-in debt ceiling and balanced budget mechanism.Make 3/4 of Congres required to change any of this.100x better than what we have now IMO and does not require a new Constitutional Amendment, only the repal of the 16thA. of course repealing the 17th giving Ststaes a say again, would cement it I think.
- Permalink Reply by on
- if you leave the 14th and 17th in place the Congress and the Courts will continue to usurp so the goals of your and drive big trucks through the holes created with the court presidents - maybe not progressive income tax but duties, tariffs and trade wars to raise more money.Sorry, but just taking one gun from a thief and leaving him two [that you made them agree by 3/4 to shoot us] guns to kill our freedoms and limited government ideas. JMHO
- Permalink Reply by on
- Ok let me try to communicate the principle another way. For the first most part the Courts kept the Congress and the Executive in check - rejected income tax, rejected re distribution, rejected much of the Progressive goals. This started to change in 1913 with the Income tax and the Fed giving a very large increase in power to the Federal government [first gun and usurpation] - then came FDR and the second gun where One vote in the Supreme Court saved nine [Justices that is] which is the second gun giving Congress almost unlimited powers over the States. Now two guns are combined into forcing huge holes in the 14th amendment and the 17th amendment giving even more Power to the Federal government and reducing the rights of the states and the people.Go now to the law suits regarding court ordered busing [14th amendment the second gun] and then they also found the clauses like the necessary and proper, the 14th amendment general clauses - has been very abusive. see number 5.Now the the Progressive high rate income tax became the big gun money to bribe States not to nullify and to accept usurpation. They also got enough money to bribe the voters [civil service Unions and other Unions] - removing the 16th limits this gun but leaves the two most dangerous the usurpation of clauses and the 14th amendment.It is like saying we have neutralized Russia because we torn down the wall. IMO you either fix it all or you are just extending the usurpation of powers and they {congress and president} will just increase all permits fees, duties and tariffs until they replace the cash flow and the people will suffer even more as other nations retaliate - we will then have a trade war without any energy policy or manufacturing in place.the 16th is just one gun and the other two will kill the Republic just as surly. If I sound harsh it is because compromise is a form of losing when you are speaking of our Constitutional freedoms.
Article. XIV.
[Proposed 1866; Allegedly ratified 1868. See Fourteenth Amendment Law Library for argument it was not ratified.]Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.Section. 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.Section. 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.Section. 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Lock - That clarifies your point. But that means biting off in a single chunk more than the people will chew and the end result is being right without any changes. Incrementalism got us where we are now, it will get us out, hopfully in bigger chunks than smaller.So, leaving the 14th and the 17th aside, only for the moment, we must take a step in the right direction - that the people will follow.Like it or not a tax plan simular that which I propose is being embraced more every day. Simplification. Pragmatic - could easily lead to repeal of the first of the 3 Constitutional harpies.Once people see it works, they are open to more - the 14thA and 17thA. We must start at the lowest common denominator -taxation. The first step, certainly not the last. It also breaks the back of the class warfare tactic. If everyone pays the same percentage 'thier fair share" taxation is removed from the class warfare debate.If you want to do all of it, in one fell swoop - all or nothing, then I will not go down that road, not because it is wrong, but because it wont work. We need to get this Country confident again so we can work from a stronger position. I truly do not believe there is enough time on the current track to fix it all before it falls over under its own weight.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Corporate interests are to benefit the stockholders Troy. Some are rich, some are middle class. Many seniors have invested in those Corporations that pay dividends, which allow them to be retired. Those same Corporations are what many other pension funds are invested in.Corporate does not equal rich. Corporate does not equal evil.The openings for government involvement of Corporations is an issue. A no loophole tax structure combined with smaller government (regulations etc.) actually will reduce the incentive and opportunity for those large Corporations to have government influence. And vice versa.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Corporations and all businesses can NOT PAT TAXES they can only collect them for the government from all of us consumers.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Corporations & businesses do collect taxes for the Government.Some also have lousy enough accountants that they actually PAY tax on their profits ;)Yes, Lock the idea that they bury them in the price (I think you were alluding to)No loophole tax structure needs to be on REVENUE in order to make sure it gets paid by the entity on which it is laid.Afterall, no loophole, means no loophole.
No comments:
Post a Comment