3 ms·

My understanding is that the federal government cannot impose a property tax, without just distributing it to the states by population. My reading of the commer

My understanding is that the federal government cannot impose a property tax, without just distributing it to the states by population. My reading of the commerce clause is that they couldn't impose a sales tax on in-state commerce. So it's not like these went away after they gained the power to assess an income tax: they were never an option. As a general rule, you could remove any government agency created with the increase in wartime tax revenue after the war is over. That should get you back to the pre-war tax rate. I don't want to go down the entire list[1] of agencies, since it would take the thread too far off-topic(even this response is borderline). I should shift more work to the individual states. Also cut the military: They are so disorganized they're the only government branch that can't be audited[2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_agencies_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_agencies_in_th... [2] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-audit-army-idUSKCN10U1IG http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-audit-army-idUSKCN10U1...

harryh 10y ago
As a general rule, you could remove any government agency created with the increase in wartime tax revenue after the war is over. That should get you back to the pre-war tax rate. Pre war federal spending was ~10% of GDP. Currently we're at about 25%. So you want to cut federal spending by about 60%. Medicare is about 15% of the fed budget. Social Security is about 25%. That's the 40% you get to keep right there. You think we should cut literally everything else? Your assessment about what it would take to achieve the cuts you propose is not based in reality.
- MichaelBurge 10y ago
  I would cut Medicare and Social Security entirely.
  - brianwawok 10y ago
    Okay so what happens to the 30 million people that literally have nothing else to live on? 65 years old, no savings, failing health. Round them up and shoot them I guess?
    - MichaelBurge 10y ago
      It may help to think of the suggestion as more a "We never should've passed it in the first place" rather than a suggestion to immediately propose a bill of repeal. I have some thoughts on how to conduct an orderly shutdown of the programs over, say, 30 years, but they would take the thread too far away from the subject of stock options.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> My reading of the commerce clause is that they couldn't impose a sales tax on in-state commerce. (1) The commerce clause is a grant of power, not a limit. It's indisputable that the commerce clause does not authorize a tax on in-state commerce, but it doesn't prohibit one, either. So we need to look beyond the commerce clause and ask if a federal sales tax is authorized anywhere else. (2) The dollar value of sales is income, derived from sales. The 16th Amendment gives Congress the authority to "lay and collect taxes on income, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states". Therefore, a federal tax on the gross income from sales is authorized by the 16th Amendment. (3) But, wait, we don't even need the 16th Amendment. There's a special word for a tax on sales of goods -- its called an "excise". And its an express Constitutional power of Congress even before any amendments, in the Tax and Spending Clause, with the restriction that they must be uniform throughout the United States.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

harryh 10y ago

As a general rule, you could remove any government agency created with the increase in wartime tax revenue after the war is over. That should get you back to the pre-war tax rate. Pre war federal spending was ~10% of GDP. Currently we're at about 25%. So you want to cut federal spending by about 60%. Medicare is about 15% of the fed budget. Social Security is about 25%. That's the 40% you get to keep right there. You think we should cut literally everything else? Your assessment about what it would take to achieve the cuts you propose is not based in reality.

MichaelBurge 10y ago
I would cut Medicare and Social Security entirely.
- brianwawok 10y ago
  Okay so what happens to the 30 million people that literally have nothing else to live on? 65 years old, no savings, failing health. Round them up and shoot them I guess?
  - MichaelBurge 10y ago
    It may help to think of the suggestion as more a "We never should've passed it in the first place" rather than a suggestion to immediately propose a bill of repeal. I have some thoughts on how to conduct an orderly shutdown of the programs over, say, 30 years, but they would take the thread too far away from the subject of stock options.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> My reading of the commerce clause is that they couldn't impose a sales tax on in-state commerce. (1) The commerce clause is a grant of power, not a limit. It's indisputable that the commerce clause does not authorize a tax on in-state commerce, but it doesn't prohibit one, either. So we need to look beyond the commerce clause and ask if a federal sales tax is authorized anywhere else. (2) The dollar value of sales is income, derived from sales. The 16th Amendment gives Congress the authority to "lay and collect taxes on income, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states". Therefore, a federal tax on the gross income from sales is authorized by the 16th Amendment. (3) But, wait, we don't even need the 16th Amendment. There's a special word for a tax on sales of goods -- its called an "excise". And its an express Constitutional power of Congress even before any amendments, in the Tax and Spending Clause, with the restriction that they must be uniform throughout the United States.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]