I owe, I owe. It’s off to work I go . . . no wait. It’s off to work you go if you can find a job. Regardless, you still have to pay taxes. Even though it’s been said that all you have to do in life is to pay taxes and die, I believe that it doesn’t matter if you die. You still have to pay taxes. It certainly is disconcerting to find that Barack Obama and Joe Biden fell into an 18% tax bracket. I guess with all the charitable deductions, they managed that. Why can’t all Americans pay a flat tax, or a fair tax? God requires 10%. Why should the government be entitled to more?
If you have to claim perks from your job as income, how did they do that with all of the taxpayer-paid vacations they took last year? Those alone should place them in the highest tax bracket in the land. However, I guess their tax accountants are liberals, and they know all the loopholes, and if they don’t, they probably make the rest up. As for the rest of us, we’re left in shock and awe when we see the bottom line.
Ron Paul is right when he says that Americans should be able to keep 100% of the money they earn instead of having the government take from them that which is rightfully theirs. However, many Americans don’t understand how the government can operate if individual taxpayers are not picking up the tab. When our country was founded, the Founding Fathers utilized external taxation to eliminate national deficits. Only when the external taxation did not eliminate the entire deficit did internal taxation become authorized by Congress. When internal taxation became necessary, it lasted only as long as it took to eliminate the nation’s debt. Individuals did not have to pay the federal government; individual states and foreign enterprises paid the taxes. So is our Constitutional plan.
The Framers of the Constitution provided a specific method to extinguish anticipated deficits through an emergency direct tax. Alexander Hamilton, in No. 36 of The Federalist Papers, reminds us: “Let it be recollected that the proportion of these taxes is not to be left to the discretion of the national legislature, but is to be determined by the number of each State, as described in the second section of the first article [United States Constitution]. An actual census or enumeration of the people must furnish a rule, a circumstance which effectively shuts the door to partiality and oppression. The abuse of this power of taxation seems to have been provided against with guarded circumspection.”
Thomas Jefferson knew the perils of unnecessary government. In Jefferson’s Second Inaugural Address (March 4, 1805), he points out: “At home, fellow citizens, you best know whether we have done well or ill. The suppression of unnecessary offices, of useless establishments and expenses, enabled us to discontinue our internal taxes. These covering our land with officers, and opening our doors to their intrusions, had already begun that process of domiciliary vexation which, once entered, is scarcely to be restrained from reaching successively every article of produce and property . . . The remaining revenue on the consumption of foreign articles, is paid cheerfully by those who can afford to add foreign luxuries to domestic comforts, being collected on our seaboards and frontiers only, and incorporated with the transactions of our mercantile citizens, it may be the pleasure and ride of an American to ask, what farmer, what mechanic, what laborer, ever sees a tax-gatherer of the United States?”
This patriotic and skillful use of external taxation not only filled our national treasury, but gave American ship builders a hometown advantage and predictably resulted in America’s Merchant Marine becoming the most powerful on the face of the planet. There was a day when our national treasury was gladly filled by foreigners paying for the opportunity to do business on American soil. But this was when members of Congress, and those running for Office, put American interests first and would have considered the NAFTA, GATT, and the WTO as acts of sedition, and would have tarred and feathered those participating in the surrender of America’s sovereignty. A national sales tax plan which omits external taxation is a principal source to fill our national treasury, is in fact, a surrender of national sovereignty to the advantage of foreign interests, according to John William Kurowski, the founder of The American Constitutional Research Services.
Kurowski notes, “There is no smoke and mirrors with the ‘Fair-Share’ method of balancing the budget. The emergency direct tax is required to be imposed whenever Congress closes a fiscal year with a deficit. The structural mechanism which would immediately bring fiscal sanity to Congress is the requirement of having Congress send a bill to the governor of each state, notifying of remittance due of the state’s apportioned share toward extinguishing the deficit created during the year by Congress; the governors and state legislators being left with the burden of having to raise this money, and to send it off to Washington, D.C.”
Many political pundits appearing on talk shows across our country are far more articulate than I in identifying the glaring defects and dishonest nature of income taxation, whether flat or progressive. Likewise, there is also an abundant supply of those presenting well-rehearsed arguments against an across the board national sales tax, and have displayed their rhetorical skills quite admirably. But who has made a substantial argument against the Founding Fathers’ original tax reform package? Perhaps our only problem in regard to tax reform is that we, as a nation, have lost touch with the original intent and wisdom of those who framed and ratified our Constitution . . . such negligence culminating in our current dilemma.