Tax the Corporations Directly and the People Indirectly

[Keith Broaders]

INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX RATES

CORPORATE INCOME TAX RATES

Taxing income is and always has been unconstitutional. Individuals have God given rights that include the right to life, liberty and property. When a person trades his labor for another man's money is not income. Income is the profit that one earns from corporate activity.

Corporations do not have rights because they are legal fictions created by governments. The do not have rights, they have privileges. I think that Congress should stop taxing the people and should increase the tax rates on corporations to over 50%. This would motivate many of the owners of corporations to become sole proprietorships.

Sole proprietorships would have a substantial advantage over corporations and would make it very difficult for the corporations to compete. One of the main functions of the Federal government is to protect the individual's lives, liberty and property from the abuse of power by corporations.

Giving a corporation a tax deduction for bribing Congressmen is a stupid idea. Corporation can't vote and they should not be allowed to donate money to elect candidates. Only individuals have rights and corporation have their power diminished.

A Corporate CEO should be taxed at the same rate as the corporations that employ them. Employees of corporations would also be subject to income tax because the money they receive is derived from corporate activity. Individuals that are not employees of corporations would not pay income tax while corporate employees would be subject to the income tax.

[Morton Thomson Jr.]

There is NO SUCH THING as an informed electorate today John Gaver. Sorrry for the emphasis on using your last name, but we have a lot of Johns; no pun intended. And revenue neutral is code for "this wont address the real problem of an overblown Federal government". Shrink the cancerous tumor, then address the cure for how it got there in the first place.

[John Gaver]

Morton, part of the idea of a sales tax that shows up on every sales receipt, is to gently inform the electorate about their taxes. Initially, they won't pay much attention to the tax rate when they make minor purchases. But when they buy larger items, such as appliances, televisions, cars, etc., the tax rate will suddenly become visible and that will get a lot of people thinking about how much tax they pay for groceries, clothes and coffee makers. Sure, some people will remain forever in a cloud. But as I stated earlier, there is the "possibility" that some taxpayers will be "encouraged" to contact their congressman about lowering taxes, even if it means cutting some spending.

But never forget that spending and taxes (income) are not in any way connected, especially when it comes to government. The only way you can ever connect taxes and spending will be with a balanced budget amendment.

[Terry Trussell]

John, you are right, of course, reality demands a 'revenue neutral' segue into the masses accepting responsibility for their own lives, but we must have goals. As long as we are in agreement that 10% (or lower) is our prime principle in reaching our prime objective: permanent prevention of a metastasizing bureaucracy, we can proceed with implementation. I would also suggest we establish a schedule for reaching our goals, just so we can keep score, say, ten years?

[Morton Thomson Jr.]

You're exactly right Terry,

But I believe it is only a matter of 4% of a populace necessary to a change. The original number involved in the original change to our current system was a matter of only 4%. Think about this though. If you do the math, that comes out to 12.2 million people today. That's a crap-load of people. OAS is how many?

[Terry Trussell]

Morton, I'm not sure about the numbers, but I recall reading somewhere, that only 10% of the colonials was even aware of the revolution, and that only 10% of those were actively involved in the revolution, either as soldiers, or in support. OAS may only be a few thousand today, but it's ranks are swelling. Over two million of us showed up for 9/2/09, and that substantially changed our nation, regardless what the left would have us believe. If we can get half as many to maintain a daily presence in DC, to accomplish our objectives, we will change the world. and it's not how many who go to DC (although the numbers must be large) but those who can't, or choose not to go, but give their support.

[Wayne Bachmann]

Terry,

Are you related to Danny Trussell who grew up in Salem, Oregon, whose parents had a skating rink? We grew up together. He met a lady from Canada, got married, and I haven't seen him since.

Wayne Bachmann

[Terry Trussell]

Sorry, not familiar with Danny. I have a cousin, Joe Trussell, in Vancouver, WA. Joe is our family historian--I'll ask. Are you familiar with Capt. Horatio Trussell--a fascinating story. Google it. Danny could be related to him.

[John Gaver]

Terry, I agree, at least in principle, about goals. I use goals all the time in my personal life. In fact, goals were a very important part of my last book, "The Rich Don't Pay Tax! …Or Do They?" http://TheRichDontPayTax.com/

But Congress has proven that they won't be held to any goals; even the goals that they set for themselves, let alone goals that we set for them.

That's why we need a balanced budget amendment. Until we get that, it's useless to try to tie spending to taxes. We could pass the FairTax or any other tax package with a 5% tax rate and it would have absolutely zero effect on how much Congress spends. They'll just borrow more.

Goals are great tools, when used on a personal basis. But trying to hold others (especially congressmen) to your goals is useless. That's just the way it is.

[Terry Trussell]

John, you're right. Goals require personal commitment. Our representatives' personal goals are definitely not our best interests. They are more consumed by feathering their own nests (with our feathers!).

Our State governments require balanced budgets and demand accountability. Our federal bureaucracies should do no less. And borrowing should only be permitted in times of national emergencies (of course these idiots consider a paper cut, a national emergency) and should only be funded by our own citizens. To accept money from a foreign interest is treason.

[John Gaver]

Terry,

"To accept money from a foreign interest is treason."

Absolutely!

[Simon Leland]

Morton,

It's good to know I'm not the only crazy person!

Simon

[Wayne Bachmann]

Excellent! This is what W. Cleon Skousen told us in our constitutional seminar in Las Vegas in 1976