4 ms·
The argument and points still stand. It’s hard to imagine that one can reasonably describe income taxes as theft but not other forms of taxation. I suppose on
by sykh 8y ago
The argument and points still stand. It’s hard to imagine that one can reasonably describe income taxes as theft but not other forms of taxation. I suppose one can call other sorts of taxes as pernicious or akin to theft but in the United States, at the federal level, I don’t think any of those sorts of taxes exist.
- samatman 8y agoParent said income tax was unconstitutional for a reason. He did not say it was theft. You're generalizing without evidence.
- s73v3r_ 8y agoParent also did not offer any supporting evidence for their argument that it's unconstitutional.
- late2part 8y agohttps://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/tenth_amendment https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/tenth_amendment
- s73v3r_ 8y agoThat doesn't provide evidence for it being unconstitutional, especially considering the right of Congress to tax was in the Constitution, and the Sixteenth Amendment explicitly gives them the right to lay income taxes.
- greatamerican 8y agoI obviously refer to the passage of the 16th amendment. Note the choice of the word "WERE."
- sykh 8y agoI think it’s clear that parent was equating income taxes to theft. The article we are all nominally commenting on is about theft. Parent says he/she can get behind the movement against said theft and that there is a reason that income taxes were unconstitutional. I think I have enough evidence to base my conclusion on. If you really think that I’m wrong in thinking that parent believes that income taxes are theft then why wasn’t this your objection to begin with?