PDA

View Full Version : Cost of federal taxation for matters not having to do with the enumerated powers



donttread
06-10-2015, 06:50 AM
Our federal government knowingly ( and in my opinion unconstitutionally) taxes citizens for expenses well outside the federal government's authority and even well beyond money they have any intention of actually using at the federal level.
While both "sides" of the Donkephant's mouth talk about this and display charts to show which states get how much of their own tax payers money back:
No one ever seems to talk much about the massive cost and waste involved with the collection of tax monies earmarked to return to the states anyway, the cost of congressional time choosing who gets what , the interest associated with holding hundreds of billions of dollars over time , the cost of redistribution and the expense to the states that the usual "strings attached" cost the states. Not to mention the cost of having our federal lawmakers working on state business instead of managing our broke ass war mongering federal issues. What would you guess a real cost accounting of this process might show ? Fifteen percent waste? Higher?

Peter1469
06-10-2015, 02:45 PM
Probably higher.

MisterVeritis
06-10-2015, 03:43 PM
The greatest cost is in lost liberty. Lost liberty impacts innovation and therefore productivity. Lost productivity means wages remain flat. It also results in lost jobs.

donttread
06-10-2015, 07:43 PM
The greatest cost is in lost liberty. Lost liberty impacts innovation and therefore productivity. Lost productivity means wages remain flat. It also results in lost jobs.

Yes, the system has made State's Rights a complete mockery. That's why states should step in, take all the withholdings and send the feds only what is needed to conduct Constitutionally authorized federal business.

MisterVeritis
06-10-2015, 07:46 PM
Yes, the system has made State's Rights a complete mockery. That's why states should step in, take all the withholdings and send the feds only what is needed to conduct Constitutionally authorized federal business.
I think the Article V convention of states to propose amendments is the next logical step. After that we can move to rebellion.

donttread
06-10-2015, 07:57 PM
I think the Article V convention of states to propose amendments is the next logical step. After that we can move to rebellion.

Fair enough, must if must rebel we should do so a states

MisterVeritis
06-11-2015, 11:40 AM
Fair enough, must if must rebel we should do so a states
There is something not quite right with this statement.

A rebellion would most likely involve a small number of people, perhaps 3-5% spread across many states. Another 20% might passively assist. That would be enough to further cripple the nation but not enough to win. The first number, of active participants, is probably enough. But the second number must approach one third in order to have a good chance to win.

rembrant
06-13-2015, 01:04 PM
Our federal government knowingly ( and in my opinion unconstitutionally) taxes citizens for expenses well outside the federal government's authority and even well beyond money they have any intention of actually using at the federal level.
While both "sides" of the Donkephant's mouth talk about this and display charts to show which states get how much of their own tax payers money back:
No one ever seems to talk much about the massive cost and waste involved with the collection of tax monies earmarked to return to the states anyway, the cost of congressional time choosing who gets what , the interest associated with holding hundreds of billions of dollars over time , the cost of redistribution and the expense to the states that the usual "strings attached" cost the states. Not to mention the cost of having our federal lawmakers working on state business instead of managing our broke ass war mongering federal issues. What would you guess a real cost accounting of this process might show ? Fifteen percent waste? Higher? I can guess by your tag you are a Teabag or libertarian and likely a states rights,anti tax freak who gets ideas from a cult of propaganda goons who LIE to the vulnerable and ill informed.

The whole matter of what the Federal Gov can do....is VERY comlex and there's a few hundred years of PRECEDENT. To KNOW squat about that... takes a few years at a good law school. The whole deal about the Fed/State powers or powers of branches.. takes a LOT of knowledge... WAY beyond what some cracker gets off a low credibility blog. Actually... it's beyond the skillset of the average lawyer...but at least that Lawyer KNOWS what he does NOT know.

Peter1469
06-13-2015, 01:21 PM
That is an arrogant and dismissing response to something that really is not all that difficult.

The American States under the Articles of Confederation decided that their central government did not have enough power to be effective. So they called a Constitutional Convention. They created a more powerful federal government, but not an all powerful federal government.

They granted only limited and enumerated powers to the Federal government and all other sovereign powers remained with the States.

Granted, all branches of our federal government have chipped away at this Constitutional framework, but the concept remains. Simple and unassailable.



I can guess by your tag you are a Teabag or libertarian and likely a states rights,anti tax freak who gets ideas from a cult of propaganda goons who LIE to the vulnerable and ill informed.

The whole matter of what the Federal Gov can do....is VERY comlex and there's a few hundred years of PRECEDENT. To KNOW squat about that... takes a few years at a good law school. The whole deal about the Fed/State powers or powers of branches.. takes a LOT of knowledge... WAY beyond what some cracker gets off a low credibility blog. Actually... it's beyond the skillset of the average lawyer...but at least that Lawyer KNOWS what he does NOT know.

donttread
06-14-2015, 08:56 AM
I can guess by your tag you are a Teabag or libertarian and likely a states rights,anti tax freak who gets ideas from a cult of propaganda goons who LIE to the vulnerable and ill informed.

The whole matter of what the Federal Gov can do....is VERY comlex and there's a few hundred years of PRECEDENT. To KNOW squat about that... takes a few years at a good law school. The whole deal about the Fed/State powers or powers of branches.. takes a LOT of knowledge... WAY beyond what some cracker gets off a low credibility blog. Actually... it's beyond the skillset of the average lawyer...but at least that Lawyer KNOWS what he does NOT know.

Do you know where my "cult" gets it's "propaganda" ? From something called the Constitution and BOR's. It;s remarkably straight forward for example if the founders meant for your precious "Commerce Clause" to over ride the enumerated powers they wouldn't have written the enumerated powers to begin with. Duh. The federal government exist to act as a collective agent for the states in situations where this necessary evil is unavoidable. Period!
Have you ever read the Constitution and BOR's? Not the bastardized version the Donkephant appointed courts have put out over the past 102 years but the real deal. Have you? If so tell me what's so damn complicated about it?