Tax the Rich!

Links? Quotes? citations from documents?


If you were to do a search on "Income Inequality" especially using a Founders name (I use Jefferson) you will find out much. This is from a letter written by Jefferson to James Madison in 1785:

Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise.

Whenever there are in any country uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labor and live on. If for the encouragement of industry we allow it to be appropriated, we must take care that other employment be provided to those excluded from the appropriation. If we do not, the fundamental right to labor the earth returns to the unemployed. It is too soon yet in our country to say that every man who cannot find employment, but who can find uncultivated land, shall be at liberty to cultivate it, paying a moderate rent. But it is not too soon to provide by every possible means that as few as possible shall be without a little portion of land. The small landholders are the most precious part of a state.
 
Werbung:
If you were to do a search on "Income Inequality" especially using a Founders name (I use Jefferson) you will find out much. This is from a letter written by Jefferson to James Madison in 1785:

Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise.

Whenever there are in any country uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labor and live on. If for the encouragement of industry we allow it to be appropriated, we must take care that other employment be provided to those excluded from the appropriation. If we do not, the fundamental right to labor the earth returns to the unemployed. It is too soon yet in our country to say that every man who cannot find employment, but who can find uncultivated land, shall be at liberty to cultivate it, paying a moderate rent. But it is not too soon to provide by every possible means that as few as possible shall be without a little portion of land. The small landholders are the most precious part of a state.


You are a precious source of very good information! Thank you again for coming up with the "proof" that some people need to believe what seems so evident to most!
 
If you were to do a search on "Income Inequality" especially using a Founders name (I use Jefferson) you will find out much. This is from a letter written by Jefferson to James Madison in 1785:

You left out the fact that Jefferson opposed income taxes and sales taxes and that he believed government revenues should be derived from tariffs on imported goods. (Tariffs are an indirect tax levied against the supplier, who then raises the cost of the imports to offset the difference, and the higher costs are then absorbed by the people purchasing the imported goods.)

Using that quote to claim Jefferson was in favor of a Progressive Income Tax system is totally dishonest... I can see why the Left uses it.
 
You left out the fact that Jefferson opposed income taxes and sales taxes and that he believed government revenues should be derived from tariffs on imported goods. (Tariffs are an indirect tax levied against the supplier, who then raises the cost of the imports to offset the difference, and the higher costs are then absorbed by the people purchasing the imported goods.)

Using that quote to claim Jefferson was in favor of a Progressive Income Tax system is totally dishonest... I can see why the Left uses it.

Here we go again with the lack of knowledge of the Founders as so many seem to be, and then calling one something you have no knowledge of.

Constitutionally speaking, tariffs, duties, and posts, were established for the purpose of taxing the rich, and the rich alone, since it was the rich who were the ones who bought luxury goods, or imported goods.

In another letter to Thaddeus Kosciusko in 1811, Jefferson wrote "The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the general government are levied.... The farmer will see his government supported....without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings?"

It wasn't that Jefferson supported a progressive tax, it was that Jefferson understood that if the wealth of a nation was ever accrued by the few then liberty was lost. Have you not seen the quote of Jefferson where he warns of the aristocracy of the banks, and the corporations, and how he wished to "crush" such an aristocracy in its infancy?

IMO, you can never have the limited government that Jefferson desired with the wealth controlled by a few. Look at what happened to Britain when the East Indies Co. controlled the wealth. Jefferson also opposed government assistance to corporations, or corporate influence on government. If not for the current system we would not have had a distortion of the Constitution as we have seen in many cases the latest being the Kelo decision by the USSC, and the Citizens United decision, which only served to promote benefits to the corporate world, and also to international unions.

In case you have not noticed, or heard, corporations/Wall Street supported the election of Obama, and even Obamacare. In fact, 1/3 of the contributions to Obama this year has been from Wall Street.

In any event, I would support the egalitarian beliefs of Jefferson before I would support the Internationalist views of the "right" which condones the use of slave labor such as in China, the use of human trafficking of child slaves as in the cacao fields of Africa, or the enslavement of the American worker to the demands of the corporate world thus making the American people more dependent on the government for their subsistence.
 
Among the rich there are no doubt those that create jobs and those that don't. Giving each and everyone of them a tax break based on the idea that some of them will create jobs is favoritism and is not sound. But we should not place obstacles in the place of anyone who would create a job and staying out of the way of all people equally is not favoritism and is sound. By all means lets tax all people equally but lets not let any of our taxes be obstacles.
What????
 
Using that quote to claim Jefferson was in favor of a Progressive Income Tax system is totally dishonest

Here we go again with the lack of knowledge of the Founders as so many seem to be, and then calling one something you have no knowledge of.

Jefferson did not support an income tax at all. To claim otherwise is intentionally dishonest.

People also use quotes from Jefferson concerning the Clergy and the Church to claim he would have supported the Left's Anti-theist views, such as the desire to remove all religious symbols from public view.

Such claims are also dishonest.

In Jeffersons time, religion, business, wealth, power and government, were not separate concepts but all part of the same monarchy that ruled England. That system was the predominant system of government in most countries of the world. The fact that the wealthy business interests and powerful clergy he railed against represented the power of the government is of primary importance, pretending otherwise is dishonest.
 
Using that quote to claim Jefferson was in favor of a Progressive Income Tax system is totally dishonest



Jefferson did not support an income tax at all. To claim otherwise is intentionally dishonest.

People also use quotes from Jefferson concerning the Clergy and the Church to claim he would have supported the Left's Anti-theist views, such as the desire to remove all religious symbols from public view.

Such claims are also dishonest.

In Jeffersons time, religion, business, wealth, power and government, were not separate concepts but all part of the same monarchy that ruled England. That system was the predominant system of government in most countries of the world. The fact that the wealthy business interests and powerful clergy he railed against represented the power of the government is of primary importance, pretending otherwise is dishonest.


Agreed.

It is also NOT correct that only the rich in Jefferson's time purchased imported goods. This is a complete fabrication. Rich and poor Americans purchased imported goods since the young American nation could not produce all that was needed.

One example is firearms. All firearms and most of the materials needed to operate them were imported. Nearly every American of that time rich and poor, owned a firearm.

Imports are all products brought into the colonies most of which were from England. Colonists imported much more than they exported so, the balance of trade was in England's favor. The colonists imported (or made at home) almost everything they needed to sustain life: Clothing, fumiture, tools, silver, books, some foodstuffs, leathergoods, sugar, molasses, weapons and slaves.
http://score.rims.k12.ca.us/score_lessons/market_to_market/pages/exportsimports.html
 
If you were to do a search on "Income Inequality" especially using a Founders name (I use Jefferson) you will find out much. This is from a letter written by Jefferson to James Madison in 1785:

Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise.

Whenever there are in any country uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labor and live on. If for the encouragement of industry we allow it to be appropriated, we must take care that other employment be provided to those excluded from the appropriation. If we do not, the fundamental right to labor the earth returns to the unemployed. It is too soon yet in our country to say that every man who cannot find employment, but who can find uncultivated land, shall be at liberty to cultivate it, paying a moderate rent. But it is not too soon to provide by every possible means that as few as possible shall be without a little portion of land. The small landholders are the most precious part of a state.

Clearly a reference to Lockes ideas of natural rights!!

The resources of a country are available to all. If in a country there is both available land and poor people who are not farming that land then obviously there has been a violation in law of natural rights. Otherwise the poor people would just go an farm the available land.

So does that apply to the U.S? Is there land available for people to claim as their own? Are there poor people?

It seems to me that the fed gov owns a whole lot of land and should make it available to the poor so they can reap the resources that are on it. When the fed owns all the land that is an example of the laws of property that have been extended so far as to violate natural right.

America is supposed to be the land of opportunity where all have equal access to the opportunities. But the founders never thought that the gov was supposed to guarantee equal outcomes from those opportunities.
 
In another letter to Thaddeus Kosciusko in 1811, Jefferson wrote "The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the general government are levied.... The farmer will see his government supported....without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings?"

I can only assume that Jefferson was lying since it is blatantly false that only the rich used imported goods. The tea tax which was a major impetus for the American revolution was a tax on imported tea which was used by just about every single American. Clearly most Americans used imported goods.

It is worthy of note that the taxes mentioned in J's quote above were levies on foreign goods paid in customs and he specifically said that no american would ever see a tax-gatherer. If we were to use this writing as a model for what to do then we would have no income taxes nor any sales taxes.

So why did J lie about the facts behind the levy? Well, as the saying goes, how do you know when a politician is lying? His mouth is moving.

J contributed a lot to the constitution but this later bit is not representative of the great work which is the law of the land and this later bit is not the law of the land.
 
Hes right,,, Theres a very smart wealthy businessman

He is wrong and he is also a fool.

Warren Buffett’s Taxing the Rich Won't Solve Deficit, Says Tax Foundation
Friday, August 19, 2011
By Matt Cover

(CNSNews.com) – Taxing millionaires and billionaires more – a position advocated by billionaire Warren Buffett and President Barack Obama – won’t make much of a dent in the national debt or the record federal budget deficits, a new study finds.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/warren-buffett-s-tax-solution-won-t-solv
 
Werbung:
But they need to pay their fair share.

Wrackkkk. If you tell us all exactly what "fair share" is, I'll give you a cracker, polly.

Here's another quote that suits you better: "help me beanie boy".
 
Back
Top