Posters - A Way to Help Ron Paul Every Day After Leaving Your Computer

FairTaxGuy,

One of the reasons the alleged fair tax is un-constitutional and one of the reasons why Ron Paul would never support it is, contrary to what you made up about Ron Paul is, the alleged fair tax proposes to lay and collect a general tax among the states upon property, real and personal, without apportionment among the states.

During the framing of our Constitution, states with superior wealth objected to allowing a power of taxation which was based upon wealth and would leave them carrying more of the federal tax burden than poorer states as was then the case under the Articles of Confederation. The wealthier Southern States felt that some compensation in their voting strength was necessary if they were to contribute a larger share of the federal tax burden.
Eventually, a compromise was reached [Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3] “Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States…….” The unequivocal intention being was an agreed upon rule determining each states’ voting strength in Congress Assembled, and also determined each states’ share of a tax, if imposts, duties [external taxes], and miscellaneous internal excise taxes were found insufficient to meet Congress’s exigencies , and, Congress found it necessary to call upon the states in a general tax to fill the national treasury.

Keep in mind our socialist friends in American, the Populist Party during the late 1800’s early 1900’s worked very hard to have a constitutional amendment adopted to remove the requirement of apportioning a specific tax among the states involving “taxes on incomes“ [see the 16th Amendment]..

H.R. 25 proposes to extend the reach of Congress’s taxing power to reach property, real and personal [which H.R. 25 would tax] without apportionment among the states and without regard to any census or enumeration, thereby closing the circle of a socialist taxing structure which reaches property, real and personal, in addition to Congress calculating taxes from profits, gains and other “incomes” which H.R. 25 does not even propose to remove from Congress‘s taxing power!

Supporters of the alleged fair tax and the socialists who worked very hard to adopt the 16th Amendment, both have something very much in common ___ the subjugation of the rule of apportionment by which the people of the various states agreed they would contribute into the common treasury if imposts, duties [external taxes] and miscellaneous excise taxes were found insufficient to meet Congress’s expenditures.

But the difference between the socialists who promoted the 16th Amendment and those who now promote the alleged fair tax is this.

The socialists who promoted the 16th Amendment were up front and promoted exactly what they wanted:

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration. “

But the weasels behind H.R. 25, who are obviously the friends of big government, are not being up front in saying exactly what they want, which is:

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes within the various states on the sale of property, real and personal, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

Instead of saying exactly what they want, direct access to the people’s property, real and personal, they hide their evil by calling their evil the “fairtax“! But when all is said and done, H.R. 25 is the same socialistic type taxing pig we now have but in a different dress!

Finally, what Ron Paul really said about a tax on consumption is this:
Quote:

Many conservatives have touted the Fair Tax proposal as an issue in the upcoming election. A pure consumption tax like the Fair Tax would be better than the current system only if we truly did away with the income tax by repealing the 16th amendment. Otherwise, we could end up with both the income tax and a national sales tax. A consumption tax also provides more transparency and less complexity. But the real issue is total spending by government, not tax reform. In other words, why change the tax structure if spending stays the same? Once we accept that the federal government needs $2.7 trillion from us – and more each year – the only question left is from whom it will be collected. Until the federal government is held to its proper constitutionally limited functions, tax reform will remain a mirage. See: Taxes, Spending, and Debt Are the Real Issues(LINK)

I know Ron Paul is not one of the co-sponsors of the alleged fair tax, even though its advocates continually attempt to connect Paul’s good name to the alleged fair tax in a favorable light.

Finally, H.R.25 proposes to create the largest entitlement in America’s history under its family consumption allowance, proposing to put every American family on the public dole and making the majority of American voters dependent upon a monthly government check which Ted Socialist Kennedy and his disciples would happily promise to increase during election time to buy votes and remain in power. Ron Paul would never support such nonsense!

The only tax reform freedom loving people need is to have the following words added to their Constitution, bringing us back to ourFOUNDING FATHER‘S ORIGINAL TAX PLAN(LINK)which was created by tax rebels and designed to control the actions of Congress, rather than having Congress control the people:

“The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money”

JWK

Well said, FairTaxGuy.
One of the important things I've learned from Dr. Paul's columns is that, as you've alluded to, taxation is only part of the picture, since the Fed allows Congress and the president to steal more from us very effectively even without raising taxes.
BTW, it's my opinion that while a federal income tax obviously is constitutional now because of the Sixteenth Amendment, a progressive income tax is not, since the amendment did not repeal the constitutional requirement that all imposts be uniform. How on earth could anyone think our "From each according to his ability" progressive income tax is "uniform"?