Should we all with hold taxes from the government in 2010 and make them get back to following the U.S. Constitution as law?
Asked by
DREW_R (
738
)
March 24th, 2009
Would only work if the majority played along. They only have so much detention space. Old question from Wis.dm.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
44 Answers
Good luck organizing that.
It’s highly unlikely, and all it would do is create further problems if you did achieve it by bankrupting your own country.
Be a good citizen and be proactive, work within the system, speak to your representatives.
This idea just seems like a temper tantrum.
No, withholding taxes on a large would ruin the US completely forcing the country to declare chapter 11 as a whole. Taxes are required for the common good. The severe recession was mainly not created by politicians but by the greed of investment bankers and the credulity of low-income consumers.
The biggest move back to the Constitution was the exit of King George. There is very little in the Constitution about taxes but the biggies-separation of powers, due process and the contents of the Bill of rights are back.
I think you are right about the majority making it work. How can we convince everyone?
Drew, you know I like this idea and always have. Technically, income tax is unconstitutional. I think this argument would hold as much water in court as capitus diminutio minima or maximus (legal fiction)
this guy has some interesting stuff
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5I21wE-h_g
The government is not “them”, it is “us”. We have voices and votes. If we break our own laws, we are contradicting ourselves. So, no.
1. What part of the Constitution do you believe the government is currently failing to follow?
2. Is it worth a stay in a Federal penitentiary to stand up for your belief that the US is no longer following the Constitution? (If they run out of detention space, they’re perfectly willing to buy more. See “Gitmo.”)
@lazydaisy: I give you the 16th amendment: “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.”
Those who object to income tax as unconstitutional seem to argue about the ratification process of the 16th amendment, but it seems to have been successfully ratified.
You go first. Let us know how it works out for you.
@laureth Totally right.
@lazydaisy The income tax is not “technically unconstitutional.” Writing that only reveals that you have not actually read the constitution. The 16th amendment is about as clear as can be.
Furthermore, I strongly second mattbrowne’s sentiment. Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society (Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr). They are both legal and moral. Taxes pay for all manner of things that I am confident you would not want to live without. You may disagree with government policies or with elected officials, but we have a system in this country of expressing that disagreement: elections.
Your idea is impossible. Laughably so. Good luck convincing the majority of Americans to be on one united side for ANY REASON WHATSOEVER.
By living in society, you agree to pay taxes. Don’t want to pay them? Move somewhere else.
Your government abandoned its Constitution way back down the road. Holding back taxes isn’t the way to solve that issue. Pitchforks, torches, and striking is. Look at how France does it.
If you have enough people willing to withhold their taxes so that it will cause a governmental crisis rather than just a bit more paperwork for the IRS, then you have enough people to write to their Congressbeing and complain. And the latter has the benefit of being legal, even.
As much as I love the thought of not paying taxes, I love the thought of my streets being plowed in a snowstorm even more. I love the thought of my kids going to a high quality and safe school. I love the thought of the police, fire, and ambulance coming when I call 911.
@Michael: At the time the 16th amendment was written, there was a serious question as to whether income tax was Constitutional. Rather than wrangle it out, Congress (and the states) passed the 16th amendment to make it perfectly clear.
At this point, though, there should be no doubt that income tax is legal, and that the government can compel you to pay it.
A Constitutional Amendment makes something law that cannot be overturned by Congress. It can only be overturned by the Supreme Court. That is why the Far Right wing wants Constitutional Amendments requiring prayer in schools, limiting the rights of gays and outlawing abortions.
Every argument against the 16th amendment’s constitutionality has been denied by the Supreme Court. Tax scofflaws may want to claim sovereignty or some kind of belief that they can pick and choose what laws they will recognize. However this is a nation of laws, not men. Under the theory of social contract we give up some liberty, including putting ourselves above the law, in order to share in the protection and benefits of citizenship.
Personally, I am satisfied to pay taxes even though I probably pay a greater than average amount (single, middle class, standard deduction) and I am willing to pay more in the near term if it will put people back to work and the money is not being wasted on useless wars. (Even then I will work to get us out of the wasteful activity and not withhold taxes-that’s so passive-aggressive) The more people who are working in the long term, the less my burden.
Enjoy prison.
If I was gonna do that, I sure as heck would have done it under the last eight years of Bush empire.
@SuperMouse All of the services you have named are state agencie services. Not federal.
How about we give the members of congress an ultimatum instead. They either take a 15% salary cut across the board or no next term for them. It’s not alot but it is a start. It hits them where it hurts, and lets them know we mean business.
I heard a lot of talk during the election about tightening our belts. Time to put up or shut up.
@galileogirl
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Benjamin Franklin – February 17, 1775
@Blondesjon: Unless you have enough people on your side that you can make that threat actually work—i.e., actually electing someone else because your Congressbeing voted against their own pay cut—it’s just so much noise.
@DREW_R Really? That’s your argument. Some fringe Paulite group saying on its website that the 16th Amendment wasn’t properly ratified trumps 90 years of settled law? Give me a break. This is right up there with the faked moon landing and bigfoot.
@Michael
Sure as hell is. Beats the socialist B.S. that has been preached for the last 90 some years.
@lazydaisy
You are only too welcome love but I shall not last in a place where freedom of speech is impinged upon. I put up a new site love. I believe you are already there. But in case you aren’t I have posted the sites URL in wis.dm, till it closes anyway. What a loss that is. I have found 0 sites as good and most are way inferior. ;)
@DREW_R – I am not sure how your freedom of speech is being impinged upon on Fluther, if that is what you are implying.
As long as you are not being arrested for the things you say here, you still have your freedom of speech. Congress shall make no law, they say.
@DREW_R
I am there and I am glad I will not have to lose connection with you. It is sad to lose our playground
@lazydaisy
I wonder what would happen if we all started random clicking on the ads on the sides of the pages at home? HUM!
@DREW_R…The fox did say that the grapes were probably sour.
@DREW_R Your pseudopolitical “expert” doesn’t trump the Supreme Court and their decisions which have reaffirmed the validity of the 16th amendment.
@galileogirl
Too bad the attys and court don’t do more research where the Constitution is involved. A good example would be same sex marriage. That is none of Congresses ground to tread upon. That is a state issue just as is the war on drugs, abortion and a whole slew of issues they are playing with.
@DREW_R…I am great at pointing out the faults in our government but I do very little after that. You seem to be very vocal in your views. Tell me, besides trying to talk the loudest, how are you fighting the fight?
@Blondesjon
Since I talk the talk I will walk the walk. Have to get the majority to join in for it to do any good though. ;)
I think I will get the majority to elect me Queen of the May. And I’m starting with Fluther. LMAO
At least MY cause has one supporter.
@galileogirl , I’m leaning towards supporting you, but I want to know more about your platform. How would your candidacy reach out to undecided voters like me?
I will dance around the Maypole tossing flowers to all equally. thus providing jobs for florists, mulch for the environment, amusement to those coming down from March Madness and generally making the earth a sweeter smelling place.
Okay, but you have to wear a garland of daisies in your hair and promise not to cut Social Security. I’m going to retire in a few years.
Soc Sec is off limits. I turn 62 this year. I was thinking more about roses for a queen of advanced years. Daisies are a little ‘twee’ and there isn’t enough profit margin to invigorate the economy. Of course that means we can’ join @DREW_R ‘s anti-tax canpaign, Maypoles don’t grow on trees.
Okay, GG, you have my support. Let me know the location of your Chicago campaign quarters, and I’ll go volunteer.
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
