Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Income taxes are illegal in the United States

dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.
My work here is, finally, done.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:08:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

Oh, major derp on my part.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:09:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

That was the amendment that was never ratified.
thett3
Posts: 14,349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:11:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:09:00 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

That was the amendment that was never ratified.

The 16th amendment was ratified....unless you're referring to the amendment process itself which is contained in the constitution (I think article 6? One of the later ones)
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:11:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
""No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.""

Here's my source: http://simpledebtfreefinance.com...

^ has analysis too
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:12:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:09:00 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

That was the amendment that was never ratified.

According to my "pocket Constitution" I got from the courthouse on Constitution Day, published by the American Bar Association, the bolded part is word for word the complete text of the 16th amendment, which was ratified on Feb 3, 1913. It was introduced in 1909.
My work here is, finally, done.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:16:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:12:37 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:09:00 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

That was the amendment that was never ratified.

According to my "pocket Constitution" I got from the courthouse on Constitution Day, published by the American Bar Association, the bolded part is word for word the complete text of the 16th amendment, which was ratified on Feb 3, 1913. It was introduced in 1909.

Apparently it was never truly ratified. It probably would be today, though.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:17:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:16:08 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:12:37 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:09:00 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

That was the amendment that was never ratified.

According to my "pocket Constitution" I got from the courthouse on Constitution Day, published by the American Bar Association, the bolded part is word for word the complete text of the 16th amendment, which was ratified on Feb 3, 1913. It was introduced in 1909.

Apparently it was never truly ratified. It probably would be today, though.

But it's part of the Constitution... so it had to have been...
thett3
Posts: 14,349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:18:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:16:08 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:12:37 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:09:00 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

That was the amendment that was never ratified.

According to my "pocket Constitution" I got from the courthouse on Constitution Day, published by the American Bar Association, the bolded part is word for word the complete text of the 16th amendment, which was ratified on Feb 3, 1913. It was introduced in 1909.

Apparently it was never truly ratified. It probably would be today, though.

According to the United States Government Printing Office, the following states ratified the amendment:[33]
Alabama (August 10, 1909)
Kentucky (February 8, 1910)
South Carolina (February 19, 1910)
Illinois (March 1, 1910)
Mississippi (March 7, 1910)
Oklahoma (March 10, 1910)
Maryland (April 8, 1910)
Georgia (August 3, 1910)
Texas (August 16, 1910)
Ohio (January 19, 1911)
Idaho (January 20, 1911)
Oregon (January 23, 1911)
Washington (January 26, 1911)
Montana (January 27, 1911)
Indiana (January 30, 1911)
California (January 31, 1911)
Nevada (January 31, 1911)
South Dakota (February 1, 1911)
Nebraska (February 9, 1911)
North Carolina (February 11, 1911)
Colorado (February 15, 1911)
North Dakota (February 17, 1911)
Michigan (February 23, 1911)
Iowa (February 24, 1911)
Kansas (March 2, 1911)
Missouri (March 16, 1911)
Maine (March 31, 1911)
Tennessee (April 7, 1911)
Arkansas (April 22, 1911), after having previously rejected the amendment
Wisconsin (May 16, 1911)
New York (July 12, 1911)
Arizona (April 3, 1912)
Minnesota (June 11, 1912)
Louisiana (June 28, 1912)
West Virginia (January 31, 1913)
Delaware (February 3, 1913)
Ratification (by the requisite 36 states) was completed on February 3, 1913 with the ratification by Delaware. The amendment was subsequently ratified by the following states, bringing the total number of ratifying states to forty-two of the forty-eight then existing:
37. New Mexico (February 3, 1913)
38. Wyoming (February 3, 1913)
39. New Jersey (February 4, 1913)
40. Vermont (February 19, 1913)
41. Massachusetts (March 4, 1913)
42. New Hampshire (March 7, 1913), after rejecting the amendment on March 2, 1911

http://en.wikipedia.org...
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:19:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:17:56 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:16:08 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:12:37 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:09:00 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

That was the amendment that was never ratified.

According to my "pocket Constitution" I got from the courthouse on Constitution Day, published by the American Bar Association, the bolded part is word for word the complete text of the 16th amendment, which was ratified on Feb 3, 1913. It was introduced in 1909.

Apparently it was never truly ratified. It probably would be today, though.

But it's part of the Constitution... so it had to have been...

One would think so. I'm not a conspiracy theorists, and generally consider conspiracy theories crack pot religions, but it's weird there would even be a question as to if it were ratified or not.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:21:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:18:04 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:16:08 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:12:37 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:09:00 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

That was the amendment that was never ratified.

According to my "pocket Constitution" I got from the courthouse on Constitution Day, published by the American Bar Association, the bolded part is word for word the complete text of the 16th amendment, which was ratified on Feb 3, 1913. It was introduced in 1909.

Apparently it was never truly ratified. It probably would be today, though.

According to the United States Government Printing Office, the following states ratified the amendment:[33]
Alabama (August 10, 1909)
Kentucky (February 8, 1910)
South Carolina (February 19, 1910)
Illinois (March 1, 1910)
Mississippi (March 7, 1910)
Oklahoma (March 10, 1910)
Maryland (April 8, 1910)
Georgia (August 3, 1910)
Texas (August 16, 1910)
Ohio (January 19, 1911)
Idaho (January 20, 1911)
Oregon (January 23, 1911)
Washington (January 26, 1911)
Montana (January 27, 1911)
Indiana (January 30, 1911)
California (January 31, 1911)
Nevada (January 31, 1911)
South Dakota (February 1, 1911)
Nebraska (February 9, 1911)
North Carolina (February 11, 1911)
Colorado (February 15, 1911)
North Dakota (February 17, 1911)
Michigan (February 23, 1911)
Iowa (February 24, 1911)
Kansas (March 2, 1911)
Missouri (March 16, 1911)
Maine (March 31, 1911)
Tennessee (April 7, 1911)
Arkansas (April 22, 1911), after having previously rejected the amendment
Wisconsin (May 16, 1911)
New York (July 12, 1911)
Arizona (April 3, 1912)
Minnesota (June 11, 1912)
Louisiana (June 28, 1912)
West Virginia (January 31, 1913)
Delaware (February 3, 1913)
Ratification (by the requisite 36 states) was completed on February 3, 1913 with the ratification by Delaware. The amendment was subsequently ratified by the following states, bringing the total number of ratifying states to forty-two of the forty-eight then existing:
37. New Mexico (February 3, 1913)
38. Wyoming (February 3, 1913)
39. New Jersey (February 4, 1913)
40. Vermont (February 19, 1913)
41. Massachusetts (March 4, 1913)
42. New Hampshire (March 7, 1913), after rejecting the amendment on March 2, 1911

http://en.wikipedia.org...

The point is that some of those states couldn't legally support the amendment or something. I'm not very well researched in this area, so I'm going to keep searching.
thett3
Posts: 14,349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:23:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:21:35 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:18:04 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:16:08 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:12:37 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:09:00 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:05:15 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

So, let me get this straight.
You quote the 16th amendment to the Constitution, yet claim it is unconstitutional? How?!? It is in the Constitution!! What are the judges supposed to do?

In case you didn't know this, SCOTUS previously ruled an income tax was unconstitutional in 1912, or so. Hence, the amendment to the Constitution .

This is the checks and balance to the courts. If something isn't allowed, you can change the law of the land so it is. However, until you do, it is against the Constitution. If not for this C&B, SCOTUS would reign supreme.

That was the amendment that was never ratified.

According to my "pocket Constitution" I got from the courthouse on Constitution Day, published by the American Bar Association, the bolded part is word for word the complete text of the 16th amendment, which was ratified on Feb 3, 1913. It was introduced in 1909.

Apparently it was never truly ratified. It probably would be today, though.

According to the United States Government Printing Office, the following states ratified the amendment:[33]
Alabama (August 10, 1909)
Kentucky (February 8, 1910)
South Carolina (February 19, 1910)
Illinois (March 1, 1910)
Mississippi (March 7, 1910)
Oklahoma (March 10, 1910)
Maryland (April 8, 1910)
Georgia (August 3, 1910)
Texas (August 16, 1910)
Ohio (January 19, 1911)
Idaho (January 20, 1911)
Oregon (January 23, 1911)
Washington (January 26, 1911)
Montana (January 27, 1911)
Indiana (January 30, 1911)
California (January 31, 1911)
Nevada (January 31, 1911)
South Dakota (February 1, 1911)
Nebraska (February 9, 1911)
North Carolina (February 11, 1911)
Colorado (February 15, 1911)
North Dakota (February 17, 1911)
Michigan (February 23, 1911)
Iowa (February 24, 1911)
Kansas (March 2, 1911)
Missouri (March 16, 1911)
Maine (March 31, 1911)
Tennessee (April 7, 1911)
Arkansas (April 22, 1911), after having previously rejected the amendment
Wisconsin (May 16, 1911)
New York (July 12, 1911)
Arizona (April 3, 1912)
Minnesota (June 11, 1912)
Louisiana (June 28, 1912)
West Virginia (January 31, 1913)
Delaware (February 3, 1913)
Ratification (by the requisite 36 states) was completed on February 3, 1913 with the ratification by Delaware. The amendment was subsequently ratified by the following states, bringing the total number of ratifying states to forty-two of the forty-eight then existing:
37. New Mexico (February 3, 1913)
38. Wyoming (February 3, 1913)
39. New Jersey (February 4, 1913)
40. Vermont (February 19, 1913)
41. Massachusetts (March 4, 1913)
42. New Hampshire (March 7, 1913), after rejecting the amendment on March 2, 1911

http://en.wikipedia.org...

The point is that some of those states couldn't legally support the amendment or something. I'm not very well researched in this area, so I'm going to keep searching.

Any state can "legally support" an amendment. Read up on the amendment process
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:27:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:11:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
""No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.""

Here's my source: http://simpledebtfreefinance.com...

^ has analysis too

I now see your point.
I suppose SCOTUS hasn't done anything as it has been in the law too long. The damage is done, and would easily be ratified now, since without it, the country would be bankrupt.

Or, the guy is misinformed.
My work here is, finally, done.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:30:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:27:53 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:11:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
""No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.""

Here's my source: http://simpledebtfreefinance.com...

^ has analysis too

I now see your point.
I suppose SCOTUS hasn't done anything as it has been in the law too long. The damage is done, and would easily be ratified now, since without it, the country would be bankrupt.

Or, the guy is misinformed.

"and would easily be ratified now"

Probably why there hasn't been much talk of it.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:32:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

The Income tax was originally implemented under Lincoln, in order to fund the civil war. After the civil war the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional, because direct taxation requires apportionment; that means the amount of direct taxes each state pays must be proportionate to their population.

Congress decided to make it constitutional, by passing the 13th amendment. A constitutional amendment is a change or alteration to the constitution. In order to propose an amendment, 2/3 of both Houses needs to vote in favor of the proposal (67 Senators, and 290 Representatives), or 2/3 of state legislatures (33 states). In order to adopt the amendment 75% of the states (38 states) need to ratify the amendment.

The 13th amendment allowed the Federal Government to tax income without apportionment.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 6:33:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:32:16 PM, DanT wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

The Income tax was originally implemented under Lincoln, in order to fund the civil war. After the civil war the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional, because direct taxation requires apportionment; that means the amount of direct taxes each state pays must be proportionate to their population.

Congress decided to make it constitutional, by passing the 13th amendment. A constitutional amendment is a change or alteration to the constitution. In order to propose an amendment, 2/3 of both Houses needs to vote in favor of the proposal (67 Senators, and 290 Representatives), or 2/3 of state legislatures (33 states). In order to adopt the amendment 75% of the states (38 states) need to ratify the amendment.

The 13th amendment allowed the Federal Government to tax income without apportionment.

Don't you mean the 16th?
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2013 7:09:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/27/2013 6:33:21 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2013 6:32:16 PM, DanT wrote:
At 3/27/2013 5:15:11 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Federal income taxes are unconstitutional

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 of enumeration.


This was upheld by the Supreme Court. I don't understand how something so blatantly illegal is happening. Opinions?

The Income tax was originally implemented under Lincoln, in order to fund the civil war. After the civil war the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional, because direct taxation requires apportionment; that means the amount of direct taxes each state pays must be proportionate to their population.

Congress decided to make it constitutional, by passing the 13th amendment. A constitutional amendment is a change or alteration to the constitution. In order to propose an amendment, 2/3 of both Houses needs to vote in favor of the proposal (67 Senators, and 290 Representatives), or 2/3 of state legislatures (33 states). In order to adopt the amendment 75% of the states (38 states) need to ratify the amendment.

The 13th amendment allowed the Federal Government to tax income without apportionment.

Don't you mean the 16th?

sorry typo
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle