Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Father Terrence who wrote (10034)	6/15/2001 11:32:50 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

You have so far come out against both property taxes and income taxes. I asked you what taxes you preferred; you didn't answer. Am I correct in assuming you want none? Or not? Or just none that you yourself pay (which actually was largely the situation with respect to the federal gov't until income tax.) I also did not indicate that I favored income tax. You stated it was illegal; I asked for proof. One of the articles you posted appears interesting, but I need to study it a bit. Another evil taxation of earned income created was that it encouraged the federal government to start spending all its ill-gotten gains on redistribution of wealth schemes, social engineering projects, "safety net" programs and legislation designed to inhibit freedoms and restrict liberties. All actions well outside of the purview of its authority and intended structure. The original vision was the centralized part of the government would be small and pretty much subordinated to States' Rights, and the States' Rights would be subordinate to the individual's rights. And I agree completely with that and consider it good reason to keep federal gov't income low. Your "arguments" are beginning to sound like Flappy's. Them's fightin' words.

To: Father Terrence who wrote (10034)	6/16/2001 3:04:16 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

Let me comment again on this: Another evil taxation of earned income created was that it encouraged the federal government to start spending all its ill-gotten gains on redistribution of wealth schemes, social engineering projects, "safety net" programs and legislation designed to inhibit freedoms and restrict liberties. All actions well outside of the purview of its authority and intended structure. The original vision was the centralized part of the government would be small and pretty much subordinated to States' Rights, and the States' Rights would be subordinate to the individual's rights. Inevitably, government largess builds up a constituency. If the income tax were declared illegal tomorrow, the federal gov't would be forced to either eliminate almost all of itself or find another source of money. I'd bet on the latter. But if that did not work and the first alternative was the only alternative, those constituencies could become quite dangerous. With a severe cutback in federal funds, the gov't might not even be able to afford an army to fight them off; revolution would and probably civil war would be the result of that. Another aspect of this is that some of the uses of those federal dollars are actually productive and useful. How do you maintain the federal highway system without money? What is the economic effect if you can't? Can and will the states take them over? Be careful what you wish for; you might get it. (Although in this case I doubt it. The federal gov't has such a strong vested interest in the income tax that it will do what is necessary to any judge to keep winning these cases.)