The Constitution and Freedom

[Anonymous]

[quote=CONCHO]Then why was the 16th amendment necessary?[/quote]

Because there was a debate about whether an income tax was “uniform” (see the second part of the Constitutional text quoted above).

The issue was about basis for determining how much individuals should pay relative to each other. There was never an issue about how the money was to be used.

Wikipedia has lots of information about the reasons for the 16th amendment.

And of course the 16th amendment was passed, so there really is no longer an issue.

[blahblahblah]

Because there was a debate about whether an income tax was “uniform” (see the second part of the Constitutional text quoted above).

Exactly, so it doesn’t really grant the power to tax anything. Adding a new tax can even require amending the Constitution. I would argue that instituting a Federal carbon tax should require a Constitutional amendment. How is it apportioned? Is it based on your body size? The length of your commute? The size of your house? The type of your car? Where you live? The 16th amendment allows unapportioned taxes on income, but CO2 output isn’t income, it’s exhaust. Of course there will never be an amendment to make this legal since it would never pass. But that’s no matter, soon there will be a little CRBN field on your paycheck stub next to your MDCR and SSDI. Why bother amending the Constitution when you can just ignore it? That’s what they’ve been doing with wars for more than 50 years.

[blahblahblah]

Because there was a debate about whether an income tax was “uniform” (see the second part of the Constitutional text quoted above).

Exactly, so it doesn’t really grant the power to tax anything. Adding a new tax can even require amending the Constitution. I would argue that instituting a Federal carbon tax should require a Constitutional amendment. How is it apportioned? Is it based on your body size? The length of your commute? The size of your house? The type of your car? Where you live? The 16th amendment allows unapportioned taxes on income, but CO2 output isn’t income, it’s exhaust. Of course there will never be an amendment to make this legal since it would never pass. But that’s no matter, soon there will be a little CRBN field on your paycheck stub next to your MDCR and SSDI. Why bother amending the Constitution when you can just ignore it? That’s what they’ve been doing with wars for more than 50 years.

[blahblahblah]

Because there was a debate about whether an income tax was “uniform” (see the second part of the Constitutional text quoted above).

Exactly, so it doesn’t really grant the power to tax anything. Adding a new tax can even require amending the Constitution. I would argue that instituting a Federal carbon tax should require a Constitutional amendment. How is it apportioned? Is it based on your body size? The length of your commute? The size of your house? The type of your car? Where you live? The 16th amendment allows unapportioned taxes on income, but CO2 output isn’t income, it’s exhaust. Of course there will never be an amendment to make this legal since it would never pass. But that’s no matter, soon there will be a little CRBN field on your paycheck stub next to your MDCR and SSDI. Why bother amending the Constitution when you can just ignore it? That’s what they’ve been doing with wars for more than 50 years.

[blahblahblah]

Because there was a debate about whether an income tax was “uniform” (see the second part of the Constitutional text quoted above).

Exactly, so it doesn’t really grant the power to tax anything. Adding a new tax can even require amending the Constitution. I would argue that instituting a Federal carbon tax should require a Constitutional amendment. How is it apportioned? Is it based on your body size? The length of your commute? The size of your house? The type of your car? Where you live? The 16th amendment allows unapportioned taxes on income, but CO2 output isn’t income, it’s exhaust. Of course there will never be an amendment to make this legal since it would never pass. But that’s no matter, soon there will be a little CRBN field on your paycheck stub next to your MDCR and SSDI. Why bother amending the Constitution when you can just ignore it? That’s what they’ve been doing with wars for more than 50 years.

[blahblahblah]

Because there was a debate about whether an income tax was “uniform” (see the second part of the Constitutional text quoted above).

Exactly, so it doesn’t really grant the power to tax anything. Adding a new tax can even require amending the Constitution. I would argue that instituting a Federal carbon tax should require a Constitutional amendment. How is it apportioned? Is it based on your body size? The length of your commute? The size of your house? The type of your car? Where you live? The 16th amendment allows unapportioned taxes on income, but CO2 output isn’t income, it’s exhaust. Of course there will never be an amendment to make this legal since it would never pass. But that’s no matter, soon there will be a little CRBN field on your paycheck stub next to your MDCR and SSDI. Why bother amending the Constitution when you can just ignore it? That’s what they’ve been doing with wars for more than 50 years.

[Eugene]

[quote=CONCHO]
Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. [/quote]

If you’re in doubt whether one thing or another is unconstitutional, there’s one impartial absolute authority you can turn to, it’s called the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court disagrees with you, that most likely means that you’re the one who misunderstands the Constitution.

[quote]
And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Of course, we’d all rather have single-payer system, like, you know, civilized countries… but you’d probably argue that it’s unconstitutional too.

[Eugene]

[quote=CONCHO]
Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. [/quote]

If you’re in doubt whether one thing or another is unconstitutional, there’s one impartial absolute authority you can turn to, it’s called the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court disagrees with you, that most likely means that you’re the one who misunderstands the Constitution.

[quote]
And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Of course, we’d all rather have single-payer system, like, you know, civilized countries… but you’d probably argue that it’s unconstitutional too.

[Eugene]

[quote=CONCHO]
Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. [/quote]

If you’re in doubt whether one thing or another is unconstitutional, there’s one impartial absolute authority you can turn to, it’s called the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court disagrees with you, that most likely means that you’re the one who misunderstands the Constitution.

[quote]
And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Of course, we’d all rather have single-payer system, like, you know, civilized countries… but you’d probably argue that it’s unconstitutional too.

[Eugene]

[quote=CONCHO]
Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. [/quote]

If you’re in doubt whether one thing or another is unconstitutional, there’s one impartial absolute authority you can turn to, it’s called the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court disagrees with you, that most likely means that you’re the one who misunderstands the Constitution.

[quote]
And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Of course, we’d all rather have single-payer system, like, you know, civilized countries… but you’d probably argue that it’s unconstitutional too.

[Eugene]

[quote=CONCHO]
Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. [/quote]

If you’re in doubt whether one thing or another is unconstitutional, there’s one impartial absolute authority you can turn to, it’s called the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court disagrees with you, that most likely means that you’re the one who misunderstands the Constitution.

[quote]
And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Of course, we’d all rather have single-payer system, like, you know, civilized countries… but you’d probably argue that it’s unconstitutional too.

[blahblahblah]

Of course, we’d all rather have single-payer system, like, you know, civilized countries… but you’d probably argue that it’s unconstitutional too.

Hahaha you obviously don’t know me very well Eugene. I’ve argued in favor of state-sponsored health care on this board many times. You may now return to your comfortable left-right paradigm…

[blahblahblah]

Of course, we’d all rather have single-payer system, like, you know, civilized countries… but you’d probably argue that it’s unconstitutional too.

Hahaha you obviously don’t know me very well Eugene. I’ve argued in favor of state-sponsored health care on this board many times. You may now return to your comfortable left-right paradigm…

[blahblahblah]

Of course, we’d all rather have single-payer system, like, you know, civilized countries… but you’d probably argue that it’s unconstitutional too.

Hahaha you obviously don’t know me very well Eugene. I’ve argued in favor of state-sponsored health care on this board many times. You may now return to your comfortable left-right paradigm…

[blahblahblah]

Of course, we’d all rather have single-payer system, like, you know, civilized countries… but you’d probably argue that it’s unconstitutional too.

Hahaha you obviously don’t know me very well Eugene. I’ve argued in favor of state-sponsored health care on this board many times. You may now return to your comfortable left-right paradigm…

[Author]

Posts