The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » So what's the best income tax rate? (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..6..9..12..14~15~16~17~18..21~22~23 [Next]
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 01:14, Dannydoyle wrote:
Here is a suggestion. Before we start throwing out what we think the constitution does and does not say, why not read it first?

This is Article 1 Section 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

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;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Here is the whole thing. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charter......ipt.html

I don't care if you agree with me or disagree with me, please read it. Not a long document.


This is also not the whole of the definintion because the burden of the State is not to limit itself to a given prescription, but rather it must be proven that the usage of a tax is NOT in the general welfare, "In its opinion, the Court warned that to challenge a federal expense on the ground that it did not promote the general welfare would "naturally require a showing that by no reasonable possibility can the challenged legislation fall within the wide range of discretion permitted to the Congress." "

Meaning, congress gets to decide if something is within the general welfare, and any challenger must prove them wrong.

"Congress appropriates money for a seemingly endless number of national interests, ranging from federal courts, policing, imprisonment, and national security to social programs, environmental protection, and education. No federal court has struck down a spending program on the ground that it failed to promote the general welfare. However, federal spending programs have been struck down on other constitutional grounds."

Source: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionar......+Welfare
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 01:10, Dannydoyle wrote:
I mean can we dictate whether they are allowed to smoke or drink or take drugs? Really it comes to being forced to pay for others behavior.


This is another red herring. Children who have never smoked a cigarette in their lives get cancer.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 01:42, critter wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 01:10, Dannydoyle wrote:
I mean can we dictate whether they are allowed to smoke or drink or take drugs? Really it comes to being forced to pay for others behavior.


This is another red herring. Children who have never smoked a cigarette in their lives get cancer.


I don't think it's entirely a red herring (though your example, of course, is correct), at least in terms of political philosophy, if not constitutional legality. We certainly know that behavior can play a large role in health issues; it's certainly worth considering the extent, if any, to which that should play a role in the discussion. If nothing else, it can be very politically unpopular to take money from people who have made good decisions in order to pay for the bad decisions of others. It reminds me of a bailout they had for homeowners who lived in a mudslide area and didn't buy insurance one rainy season some years back. Very compassionate and all, but I couldn't help but wonder what the people who had been paying insurance premiums for years thought of it.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Okay, I'll concede that point. Some folks' health conditions are the results of their own unhealthy lifestyles, but there are still many which are unavoidable. I think it throws the bathwater out with the fetus.

Now what did the founding fathers have to say about the general welfare clause?
Alexander Hamilton said of the clause:
``Every nation ... ought to possess within itself all the essentials of national supply. These comprise the means of {Subsistence, habitation, clothing, and defence.}''
http://american_almanac.tripod.com/welfare.htm
Subsistence is defined by Webster as: "a (1) : real being : existence (2) : the condition of remaining in existence : continuation, persistence b : an essential characteristic quality of something that exists c : the character possessed by whatever is logically conceivable
2: means of subsisting: as a : the minimum (as of food and shelter) necessary to support life b : a source or means of obtaining the necessities of life"
Soo... What I said before.

There's no Yada, life is in the constitution under the general welfare clause as defined by Hamilton.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
"ought to possess within itself all the essentials of national supply." Does that mean he thought the government should pay for it? Everyone's clothing? Let alone the federal government? Certainly not through an income tax; there wasn't one until long after he was dead and buried.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
There was something somewhere that individuals had the prime responsibility but that the State had the responsibility to step in "from their coffers" when individuals were unable. Might have been Ben Franklin. I will look for it.
Maybe not until tomorrow though. I'm getting tired.

Edit* Oh this was Hamilton too,
"In countries where there is great private wealth, much may be effected by the voluntary contributions of patriotic individuals; but in a community situated like that of the United States, the public purse must supply the deficiency of private resource."
He was talking of the promotion of agriculture, but a dead farmer isn't a very productive one I think.

As far as I know, taxation is the only means of funding the "public purse." I could be wrong about that though. Not my area of "expertisement." Feel free to let me know of others.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
One more thing regarding this arguement about what "general welfare" means. The Supreme Court has the final word when it comes to interpreting the constitution and they upheld my definition in Helvering v. Davis, 1937.
In this case the "general welfare" clause was used to successfully defend tax deductions for the purposes of social security.
Some relevant findings:
"5. The concept of "general welfare" is not static, but adapts itself to the crises and necessities of the times. P. 301 U. S. 641.

6. The problem of security for the aged, like the general problem of unemployment, is national, as well as local. Cf. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, ante, p. 301 U. S. 548. P. 301 U. S. 644.

7. When money is spent to promote the general welfare, the concept of welfare or the opposite is shaped by Congress, not the States. P. 301 U. S. 645."

My definition is the right one. There is legal precedent. That settles it.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
DannyDoyle is correct. The Federal Government is defined in the Constitution as a government of enumerated powers. Only those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution are legitimate. The use of the commerce clause and the general welfare clause as "mots de valise" into which absolutely anything at all can be packed is an abominable practice. The "common law" functions of government properly belong to the States. But even so, NO government has the "right" to steal. When any group of oligarchs, whether they claim to represent the aristocracy or the workingman, take the money that you earned in order to give it to someone else --who has not earned it-- for whatever reason, it is theft.

And please don't tell me that SCOTUS has the "final word." If that were true, Dred Scott and Plessy v Ferguson would still be "stare decisis" the law of the land, public facilities would still be racially segregated, and the descendants of African slaves would have no rights of citizenship at all.

Peace Out.

Woland
HerbLarry
View Profile
Special user
Poof!
731 Posts

Profile of HerbLarry
A Right doesn't take liberty or property from another citizen.
When someone figures out a way for healthcare to do that I'll consider it.
Won't happen though because nothing is free and M.D.'s are people too.
Till then healthcare and the insurance of it is a private contract between willing parties, which is why I have no problem with pregnacy & occupation being used by an insurance company to descriminate with. Both are personal decisions.
You know why don't act naive.
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 07:12, Woland wrote:
DannyDoyle is correct. The Federal Government is defined in the Constitution as a government of enumerated powers. Only those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution are legitimate. The use of the commerce clause and the general welfare clause as "mots de valise" into which absolutely anything at all can be packed is an abominable practice. The "common law" functions of government properly belong to the States. But even so, NO government has the "right" to steal. When any group of oligarchs, whether they claim to represent the aristocracy or the workingman, take the money that you earned in order to give it to someone else --who has not earned it-- for whatever reason, it is theft.

And please don't tell me that SCOTUS has the "final word." If that were true, Dred Scott and Plessy v Ferguson would still be "stare decisis" the law of the land, public facilities would still be racially segregated, and the descendants of African slaves would have no rights of citizenship at all.

Peace Out.

Woland


That is how SCOTUS is defined in introductory criminal justice classes. The judicial branch of the Federal government is responsible for interpreting the constitution of the United States and the Supreme Court is the highest level of that branch.
By definition, they have the final word. Lobo, you know more than I do about the legal system, is this not the primary function of the judicial branch of the government?

There is an issue I take with certain people making this a personal thing against me. Instead of having an intelligent discussion about an issue, some people have chosen to put words in my mouth, assume I haven't read things that I have, and be generally insulting (foolish, my ***, my profs would disagree.) When that happens I can guaruntee that I will throw it right back, as I have. May not be the most Buddhist approach, but I guess I'm not a very good Buddhist.
In another time, lying about someone would be grounds for a duel, or at least a good fistfight. Harsher punishments for fighting and the internet have convinced people that there are no consequences for rudeness. So people will continue to make *** up and launch personal attacks to make themselves feel more powerful than they really are. It's sad that there is no expectation of common decency or honor here.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 10:46, HerbLarry wrote:
A Right doesn't take liberty or property from another citizen.


Then you have no right to be protected from criminals.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Woland, HerbLarry, are you also opposed to Medicare and Social Security?

If you are opposed to them, that's fine.

If you are not opposed, then how do you justify the existence of those mandatory programs?
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Balducci,

"Social Security" is a Ponzi scheme that would have landed its perpetrators in jail, had they been other than Federal officials. It is a colossal rip-off of the working man. Think about it: the government takes your money for years, and if you die before you retire, the government keeps all of it!

Medicare is bankrupt and will bankrupt the entire government if it is not reformed.

Both of these programs had "good intentions" but are failures.

Besides which, providing retirement income and medical care insurance are not Constitutional functions of the Federal government. End of story.

There have to be limits. The theory that the government can do anything runs counter to the system of ordered liberty that allowed America and Americans to become great.

Woland
gdw
View Profile
Inner circle
4828 Posts

Profile of gdw
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 12:24, balducci wrote:
Woland, HerbLarry, are you also opposed to Medicare and Social Security?

If you are opposed to them, that's fine.

If you are not opposed, then how do you justify the existence of those mandatory programs?


Why would those opposed to something be the one's to justify them? Or are you saying if they're wrong, then why did he government implement them? Either way this is a very odd question.
It's amazing, people will criticize you for "biting the hand that feeds you," while they're busy praising the hand that beats them.

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

I won't forget you Robert.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 13:48, gdw wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 12:24, balducci wrote:
Woland, HerbLarry, are you also opposed to Medicare and Social Security?

If you are opposed to them, that's fine.

If you are not opposed, then how do you justify the existence of those mandatory programs?


Why would those opposed to something be the one's to justify them? Or are you saying if they're wrong, then why did he government implement them? Either way this is a very odd question.


He's asking how he justifies them if he's NOT opposed. I agree, it would be odd to ask for a justification if he IS opposed.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
gdw
View Profile
Inner circle
4828 Posts

Profile of gdw
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 11:23, critter wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 10:46, HerbLarry wrote:
A Right doesn't take liberty or property from another citizen.


Then you have no right to be protected from criminals.


That is correct. You have a right to your self and your life, that doesn't behold others to protect you. The same way it doesn't behold others to provide you with food to keep you alive. You DO have a right to defend your own life, and to obtain your own food and feed yourself. That does NOT mean you have the right to the property or labours of others to do so. You can work that out with them yourselves.

The government was formed with the purpose of protecting people's lives liberty and pursuit of happiness, but that doesn't make those services a "right."

To understand "rights," think about them like this. If no one was wanting, or able to provide whatever is in question, health care, defence, etc, to you, then it is not something you have a "right" to.

In other words, if health care is a "right," what happens if no one enters into the health care profession? Can government then force people to become doctors, and then force them to service you?

You don't require others to act for you to freely express yourself. You don't require others in order for you to own "arms." In fact, think about that one. The constitution specifies a "right" to bare arms, but it does not force guns to be provided to you. Now, with health care, etc, these things are not even mentioned in the constitution (not that the constitution was meant to be exhaustive,) and yet people think they DESERVE these things provided to them.

Why don't we hear people demanding the government provide them with their arms?
It's amazing, people will criticize you for "biting the hand that feeds you," while they're busy praising the hand that beats them.

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

I won't forget you Robert.
gdw
View Profile
Inner circle
4828 Posts

Profile of gdw
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 13:54, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 13:48, gdw wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-16 12:24, balducci wrote:
Woland, HerbLarry, are you also opposed to Medicare and Social Security?

If you are opposed to them, that's fine.

If you are not opposed, then how do you justify the existence of those mandatory programs?


Why would those opposed to something be the one's to justify them? Or are you saying if they're wrong, then why did he government implement them? Either way this is a very odd question.


He's asking how he justifies them if he's NOT opposed. I agree, it would be odd to ask for a justification if he IS opposed.


Lol, thanks, that makes more sense. Man, need to get my eyes checked.
It's amazing, people will criticize you for "biting the hand that feeds you," while they're busy praising the hand that beats them.

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

I won't forget you Robert.
kcg5
View Profile
Inner circle
who wants four fried chickens and a coke
1868 Posts

Profile of kcg5
Quote:
On 2010-12-10 11:27, Carrie Sue wrote:
Hear, hear, Danny!

Democrats seem to have the opinion that all money is theirs, and what you get to keep is only the result of their good graces.

Carrie


welfare? disability?
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!!!



"History will be kind to me, as I intend to write it"- Sir Winston Churchill
kcg5
View Profile
Inner circle
who wants four fried chickens and a coke
1868 Posts

Profile of kcg5
Quote:
On 2010-12-15 14:41, HerbLarry wrote:
Quote:
balducci wrote:
You realize that pregnant women can and have been denied health insurance due to the preexisting condition of a pregnancy, right? You're fine with that?

Or that hazardous occupations like police office and fireman can also be used as preexisting conditions for denial of health insurance, right? You're fine with that too?


Yes & Yes.



more evidence of your constant jerkyness.
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!!!



"History will be kind to me, as I intend to write it"- Sir Winston Churchill
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
If a person doesn't buy health insurance when he or she is healthy, then gets sick and wants to sign up, and you want to force the insurance company (or the government) to cover him, that's not health insurance; it's welfare.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » So what's the best income tax rate? (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..6..9..12..14~15~16~17~18..21~22~23 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2022 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.07 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL