Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

14th Amendment applies to the states, not the federal government

 

:lol: Where the !@#$ do you get this ****? That's hilarious...

Posted

Are you a strict textualist now? Because IIRC you view the SC as the sole arbiter of constitutionality. Have you changed your tune on that?

In relation to the income tax? Yes, I'd rule strictly on that if some clown tried saying the Progressive income tax violated the 14th amendment. Then I'd have him put in jail

Posted

In relation to the income tax? Yes, I'd rule strictly on that if some clown tried saying the Progressive income tax violated the 14th amendment. Then I'd have him put in jail

Nice try, dipshit. You said the Equal Protection clause only applies to the states. You stand by that?

Posted

Nice try, dipshit. You said the Equal Protection clause only applies to the states. You stand by that?

 

Yes, he does...but only where taxes are concerned. :wacko:

Posted

Any income tax system that is tiered is inherently unfair. It violates the equal protection clause of the U. S. Constitution.

This is the dumb statement

Posted

This is the dumb statement

I don't think it's a winning argument, but I wouldn't call it dumb. Far greater stretches of law and logic have carried the day before the Supreme Court.

Posted

Nice try, dipshit. You said the Equal Protection clause only applies to the states. You stand by that?

The 14th amendment is about the states, yes. I stand by that. The federal gov telling the states they have to treat everyone equally.

 

Oh, and you are a complete POS

 

Yes, he does...but only where taxes are concerned. :wacko:

Obfuscating?

Posted

The 14th amendment is about the states, yes. I stand by that. The federal gov telling the states they have to treat everyone equally.

 

Oh, and you are a complete POS

 

So you were just throwing out an irrelevant non sequitur in response to a comment about the Feds violating equal protection?

Posted

I don't think it's a winning argument, but I wouldn't call it dumb. Far greater stretches of law and logic have carried the day before the Supreme Court.

It wouldn't be dumb if this was the first time that argument had been brought up and it hadn't been decided but that argument has been brought up and has been decided so it is dumb.

Posted

So you were just throwing out an irrelevant non sequitur in response to a comment about the Feds violating equal protection?

No, you don't understand what I was saying. Go back and read everything again and get back to us when you try and figure it out,

Posted

No, you don't understand what I was saying. Go back and read everything again and get back to us when you try and figure it out,

No, I got it. You were either being dishonest or you got caught with your pants down. My money's on the latter.

Posted (edited)

I regard most taxation as legalized pillaging. Every penny they steal should be fought. It's not the governments money or the communities it's mine I worked for it. It's basically immoral for them to feel they can access my property at will to distribute as they like. Anyway, a lot of taxes could probably be replaced by user fees. That way at least everything would be properly accounted for.

 

Damn...must be hard getting up in the morning being forced to contribute - everyday - to roads, schools, police, national defense, food safety, worker safety - things you use everyday without even thinking about it....the morality of it all...you know....being a citizen of a community and a country....

 

What makes your viewpoint different than your hated "moochers" ?.....seems you want all these services for nothing.....

Edited by baskin
Posted (edited)

 

Damn...must be hard getting up in the morning being forced to contribute - everyday - to roads, schools, police, national defense, food safety, worker safety - things you use everyday without even thinking about it....the morality of it all...you know....being a citizen of a community and a country....

 

What makes your viewpoint different than your hated "moochers" ?.....seems you want all these services for nothing.....

No exactly the opposite. I would rather have most of this opened up to private operators who compete and I will pay for them rather than a huge slush fund that can't and won't be accounted for. I know I will get a better product for cheaper. A superior labor force compared to government employees unmotivated because they can never go broke and so on. Some of the stuff you mention like the military and police and roads should be tax funded though. My main point is that our mentality about government and OUR money has to change. Instead of readily accepting whatever they want to do with our property(money) we should make them grind for every penny. Every level should be challenged. Like why I should pay property tax on a home that I already own? Now if you want to deny my kids school because I didn't pay my school bill I'm good with that. But why should any government be able to put a lean on my property because of unpaid taxes? It should be untouchable unless I sign off.

Edited by Dante
×
×
  • Create New...