Tiberius Posted June 3, 2015 Author Share Posted June 3, 2015 Any income tax system that is tiered is inherently unfair. It violates the equal protection clause of the U. S. Constitution. 14th Amendment applies to the states, not the federal government Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 14th Amendment applies to the states, not the federal government Where the !@#$ do you get this ****? That's hilarious... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Any income tax system that is tiered is inherently unfair. It violates the equal protection clause of the U. S. Constitution. Most tax laws are subject to “rational basis” review under the Equal Protection Clause; to be constitutional they must simply have a rational relationship to a legitimate legislative purpose. http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/clsstxep.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/clsstxep.pdf Most tax laws are subject to “rational basis” review under the Equal Protection Clause; to be constitutional they must simply have a rational relationship to a legitimate legislative purpose. We want your money and we want it NOW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2015 Author Share Posted June 4, 2015 Where the !@#$ do you get this ****? That's hilarious... From the 14th amendment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 From the 14th amendment 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2015 Author Share Posted June 4, 2015 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2015 Author Share Posted June 4, 2015 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. Obfuscating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2015 Author Share Posted June 4, 2015 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, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted June 4, 2015 Author Share Posted June 4, 2015 No, I got it. You were either being dishonest or you got caught with your pants down. My money's on the latter. No, you just don't understand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 No, I got it. You were either being dishonest or you got caught with your pants down. My money's on the latter. Dishonesty is Gators life force. Especially when his pants are down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (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 June 4, 2015 by baskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (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 June 4, 2015 by Dante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts