Monday, February 27, 2006

It's Tax Time again... Taxation without representation?

Here are some great little quotes I pulled from this site

It's worth a quick read.


"The safety of the poor man in this government is the justice of the principle embodied in all measures of legislation. If you may discriminate for him, you may discriminate against him; and perhaps it will not be long, if we go on at this rate, basing our legislation upon the ground that we intend to impose the burdens of the Government upon the rich and exempt the poor from them, until some man may be bold enough to claim that that doctrine shall be carried to its logical consequences, and that if the rich pay all the taxes, taxation and representation shall go together."
-Senator John Scott (R-PA)1866

"There has never been such a universal demand for the repeal of a tax as there has been for a repeal of this .... The people regard [the income tax] as more odious than any other description of taxation whatever; and not the least objectionable feature of it is its inequality."
-Senator Cornelius Cole (R-CA)

1 comment:

  1. I just read this and had to respond: I saw a proposal relative to the first quote not long ago. Since the earners top 50% pay something like 96% of federal taxes, he proposed that voters be weighted based on their income--$100,000 to $200,000 annual income get two votes, etc. The more your money is used, the more policy influence you have. This was proposed in response to incentives created by having a large portion of people who have no tax liability (the way it is right now) where it is very easy to buy votes from the poor with promises of Robin Hood goodies they are "entitled" to, without consent of the "Rich".

    I couldn't help but realize what an inspired and realistic approach tithing and offerings are. Everyone pays. Everyone is expected and encouraged to donate, but if you don't there is no prison or harsh penalty--there are a couple of blessings you miss out on, but it is just between you, the Lord and your Bishop and you can still serve and have fellowship in the Church. Its a matter of faith, not force, and thus those responsible for the application of the money are under a sacred obligation to do it right--if they don't they will lose members' confidence and their funds. There are no votes that can be bought with it, and it's use are clearly marked out in advance.

    It seems so simple and logical that it our current tax system looks phenomenally absurd in comparison.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.