IN THE CONSTITUTION:
Legal Discrimination,
American Style:
America discriminates on the basis of income.
If you are
successful, you have fewer rights than other citizens.
If you ask most Americans, they will tell you it is against United
States law to discriminate. Historically and technically, they are right, or
they were a hundred years ago. Our Declaration of Independence, written in
1776, declares the self-evident truth that all of us are created equal. It says
we have the inalienable, God-given right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness, a phrase meaning “retention of property” two centuries ago. Our document
of freedom further states this is a major reason for government to exist—to
demand equality before God, before the law and the courts, and in the justice
received (note: this does not mean equality of goods). In 1787, our unique
Constitution set in stone this belief in man’s God-given right to his life,
liberty and property.
This is no longer true. Government now demands, instigates, and
enforces inequality. It acts as the agent of inequality by taking your goods,
if it decides you have too many, and will put you in jail if you don’t comply
with its discrimination. You have no representation that will protect you and
no viable advocate against government policies.
What is this discrimination? The graduated income tax, enshrined
in United States law through the 16th Amendment. Who is
discriminated against? Those who “own things”—who are successful, lucky,
frugal, work very hard, or are the posterity of those who did the
aforementioned.
Constitutionally, government funds came from tariffs and
indirect taxes on purchased goods. This provided adequate income for the “limited
and close” governing system of the Founders. During the Civil War, however,
Lincoln needed war funds and a graduated income tax was imposed temporarily.
When it was extended after the war, the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional.
They declared it violated Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution, which
requires direct taxation collected only through the states and assigned by
population.
Nonetheless, public sentiment embraced a plan to “soak the
rich” and the 16th Amendment passed in 1913—not because it was good
for the country, or based on sound political principles, or verified by
historical wisdom; none of the above. It passed because of political chicanery,
as both parties of Congress jockeyed for power and played political games to
defeat each other in the public eye. Their mischief installed a devastating amendment
as federal law. At the last moment, even the congressman who proposed the
amendment, S. E. Payne of New York, pleaded with his colleagues to reject it.
He said, “I am utterly opposed…I believe…it tends to make a nation of liars…it
is the most easily concealed of any tax that can be laid, the most difficult of
enforcement, and the hardest to collect; that it is…a tax upon…honest men and
an exemption…(for) the income of rascals.”
Did it soak the rich? Hardly! The excessively rich shelter
their income through tax-exempt foundations; the moderately rich have their many
tax breaks. Graduated income tax “soaks”, all right—it soaks the middle class.
So, for now we are “stuck” with this amendment that allows a
government charged with protecting its citizens from abuse to become the agent
of abuse by confiscating personal income. The undereducated believe it is only fair
to take from those who have more. The inappropriately compassionate believe it
is only fair that the well off “give” more because they have more. They miss
the point: tax money is frivolously spent, wasted on outrageous schemes, and used
to reward political cronies. Its ready availability attracts scoundrels and the
mischievous, bureaucratic gorging, and appalling government excess that pours our
hard earned money down the proverbial drain. Its easy availability promotes
greed and dishonesty, inviting the worst in those with access to its bounty.
Finally, they miss this point: a government that
discriminates against one group will certainly have the “chutz”
to discriminate against all, in the end.
Welcome to discrimination, economic style!
No comments:
Post a Comment