Guest columnist: A dubious celebration: 100 years of income tax
This weekend marks 100 years since the passage of a resolution from Sen. Joseph W. Bailey, D-Texas, that became the 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution. It authorized the federal government to levy an income tax. The resolution was passed unanimously in the Senate (77-0) and was approved overwhelmingly by the House (318-14).
The resolution was then sent to the states for ratification. On Feb. 2, 1910, South Carolina became the third state to ratify.
On Feb. 3, 1913, Delaware provided the three-fourths majority needed to amend the Constitution.
This highly significant centennial is a cause for great mourning, as it marked the beginning of a slow deterioration of America’s liberty and economic prosperity.
What motivated our legislators to create the income tax and the IRS? “Spreading the wealth” was as attractive to liberals then as it is now.
Though it sounds attractive to some, there is one hidden catch: Middle America foots most of the bill, not the wealthy. At its core, the highly unfair income tax is a favorite tool of socialists, punishing productivity in the name of “fairness.”
The income tax began innocently enough — a mere 1 percent on the first $20,000 of taxable income and 7 percent on incomes above $500,000 (that translates to $430,000 and $10,700,000 in today’s dollars).
By 1939, only 5 percent of Americans had to file tax returns. Today, income taxes are the government’s largest source of revenue, with more than 80 percent of Americans paying income taxes ranging from 10 percent to 35 percent.
Guess what? There’s nothing whatsoever to stop them from taking all of your money.
Before you think they wouldn’t, America’s wealthy faced taxes exceeding 90 percent during the wartime years of 1944-1953. This is pure confiscation.
Worst of all, the income tax necessitated the largest government bureaucracy of all time: the IRS, charged with enforcing the tax code. In the name of “justice,” citizens are intimidated out of their Fourth Amendment rights to privacy in a system that assumes guilt before innocence. Appeals are held in tax courts without juries. To get a jury trial, you must pay the tax and then sue the government. How un-American.
Patriotic Americans find these facts very disturbing. In fact, they are so disturbed that they are taking to the streets in a wave of never-before-seen conservative protests.
If you care about your country, I challenge you to join me in front of the Anderson County Courthouse on Friday at 6:30 p.m. as we “celebrate” 100 years of the income tax.
Jonathon Hill is a resident of Townville and organized the Anderson Post-Tax Day TEA Party on April 16. He works as a grassroots activist, not on behalf of any political party. E-mail: jonathon@compwright.com
;?>/images/hdrside_news.gif "Latest News")
While y’all are tea-bagging with the Klan, try not to think about the fact that taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie). It will make you feel like a total moron.
Please share that math with us.
[Selective history]
“This weekend marks 100 years since the passage of a resolution from Sen. Joseph W. Bailey, D-Texas, that became the 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
[Actual facts]
In 1909 Senators Joseph W. Bailey of Texas, a DEMOCRAT, and Albert B. Cummins of Iowa, a REPUBLICAN, both introduced legislation to add an income tax provision.
[Actual fact #2]
The 16th Amendment was originally proposed by President Taft, a REPUBLICAN (I’m supposed to all caps here, right). So?
Ron, where’s that math?
Palmetto T-bagger,
You can start your research here http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html
This says that the current top marginal federal tax rate across all categories is 35%.
It also says that in 1989 the top marginal federal tax rate across all categories was 28%.
You’re really pretty stupid, aren’t you?
Yes, P.Conz
You were supposed to use all caps to highlight the fact that not all “bad” ideas come from Democrats as some people might assume.
As for the tax rates that’s not my area of expertise. But I do know that Reagan was President for more than one year (1989).
I’d wager that the AVERAGE “top marginal federal tax rate across all categories” during Reagans Presidency was a bit higher than 28%.
And I’m certain that you could pick a year in his term where the “top marginal federal tax rate across all categories” were higher than 35%. (I’m almost certain they were higher than that the first year after Carter.)
1989? I didn’t even think about that until I read it again.
Palmetto D-bag,
Oh, you are only interested in the top marginal tax rate? I doubt that it impacts you but here it is.
Top rates:
1980 70%
1981 70%
1982 50%
1984 50%
1985 50%
1986 50%
1987 38.5%
1988 28%
1989 28%
Average top marginal tax rate under St.Reagan = 37.16
Top marginal tax rate under Obama = 35%
You are a tool.
Palmetto D-bag,
Where was your outrage about taxes when W and the Rupubs were in charge?
Let’s skip the refresher course on TEFRA and the 1986 tax reform act, you’re clearly too stupid to understand it. However, perhaps even you can grasp (since you put it on the screen), that the top marginal tax rate fell by 42 points under Reagan.
You keep on clinging to the notion that Reagan somehow advocated higher taxes than BHO. Obviously that sells in North Carolina.
Ron, you’re still not 4 (as evidenced by the perversions in your posts), but if you need a regular spanking, keep on writing in.
Dear moRON, Are you insinuating Kev has been silent on taxes and spending? Since the inception of this blog (2005) through Bush’s last year (2008).
Here 05.04.17, Here 05.06.17, Here 05.12.14, Here 06.21.06, Here 06.02.09, Here 06.02.08, Here 06.04.30, Here 06.05.18, Here 06.05.12, Here 06.06.05, Here 06.12.07, Here 07.01.28, Here 07.03.15, Here 07.04.30, Here 07.04.27, Here 07.04.26, Here 07.04.24, Here 07.04.24, Here 07.04.21, Here 07.04.12, Here 07.05.20, Here 07.06.21, Here 07.06.06, Here 07.08.31, Here 07.10.19, Here 07.11.08, Here 08.01.31, Here 08.01.09, Here 08.02.20, Here 08.02.19, Here 08.02.14, Here 08.03.26, Here 08.03.20, Here0 8.03.13, Here 08.04.30, Here 08.04.16, Here 08.04.15, Here 08.04.10, Here 08.04.09, Here 08.04.08, Here 08.04.04, Here 08.05.27, Here 08.05.20, Here 08.06.19, Here 08.06.09, Here 08.06.05, Here 08.07.29, Here 08.08.19
Dear Palmetto Conservative, please define redundant for Ron. Use small words, he’s a slow learner.
Palmetto D bag
My point is that for 6 of St. Reagan’s years taxes were far higher than what you are currently paying. Were you T bagging then? Were you T bagging when your W was running up debt and driving the economy over a cliff?
I am shocked, shocked, that the upstanding family values senator would have a rude bitch like you running his blog.
My point is that, “the top marginal tax rate fell by 42 points under Reagan.”
Furthemore, since you earlier likened me to George Washington, let me offer you this: “The foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing is a vice so mean and low that every person of sense and character detests and despises it.”
Now, we’ve known here for some time that you are a worthless slug–and stupid too. This latest post, however, really sinks below even your pervious lows. Look, we understand that it hurts to be wrong and that it hurts even worse to be exposed as so utterly illogical that you cannot even keep up with your own train of thought.
You really ought to consider some counseling or at least stay off of those computer sights where you consume the images that you incessantly force upon us here.
Then, there always the solution that Congressman Tom Lantos offered Craig Livingstone.
Either way, have a nice day.
Palmetto Douche Bag,
You are a ridiculous pompous-ass. Please keep educating me on virtue and vice. You should also give some tips on morality to your political heroes, like Dick go-fu#&-yourself Cheney.
Anyway, it’s more fun than saying “you’re stupid!” like a 4 year old all the time.
I never asserted that Reagan advocated higher taxes than Obama. I simply pointed out the fact that for most of Reagan’s tenure, taxes were higher than they currently are under Obama.
So you’re wrong, but I won’t get you excited by talking about spanking or tea-bagging. You evangelicals or a kinky group. I’d hate to see the skeletons in your closet!
Now, stop ignoring my question. Why weren’t you tea-bagging when W was racking up deficits and running the economy over the cliff??
You asserted that, “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie).”
We all now know, ironically by your own evidence, that to be false.
Your penchant for profanity and perversion merely highlight your inability to extricate yourself from your own tiger trap.
Have a nice day.
Right Palmetto D-bag,
Up is down, black is white, and you are correct.
Why are you afraid to answer my question?
Profanity and perversion are Republicon values. Just look at Diaper-Dandy-Vitter and Wide-Stance Craig, Bill Phone-Sex O’Reilly, or Giant-Bag of Viagra-and Hillbillie-Heroin Limpballs. The more you profess virtue, the more suspect you are. And D-bag, where there’s smoke, there’s fire. You evangelicals are a hoot!
You’re not suspect at all. Your perversions are here for all to see.
Also, your fundamental misunderstanding of reality, i.e. “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie)” fully explains your need to curse and flail.
And now we see that you also harbor the prototypical hatred of religion.
Stupid, deviant and atheistic is no way to go through life, son. You do, however, provide the rest of us with many, many minutes of laughter.
Palmetto D-Bag With a Tea Bag,
“Stupid, deviant and atheistic is no way to go through life, son. You do, however, provide the rest of us with many, many minutes of laughter.”
What an uplifting message you have for a Sunday! Was that the sermon today, or the lesson that you were teaching the children at Sunday School about liberals?
You are going to have to walk me through your own special brand of South Carolina logic. The boundary between imagination and fact is clearly flimsy for you. You’re calling me perverted for pointing out the lecherous behavior of guys on your team?
Please explain how I am “deviant,” why I “hate religion” and how you have invented the fact that I am an atheist?
If I did in fact hate religion, like you’ve created in your imagination and now state as fact, that wouldn’t necessarily make me an atheist, would it genius?
And if you find deviance and atheism humorous, what kind of sick guy are you? And what kind of twisted pleasure do you get out of telling people they’re stupid? Usually people do that when they don’t feel confident in their own education and intelligence.
Now, if you are still willing to work on your math skills, I’m still willing to work with you.
I see no evidence to the contrary. I also see no evidence of a math problem here, but if that’s where your derangement leads you then happy trails.
D Bag with a Tea Bag,
Oh, so if you are unaware of evidence to the contrary, that makes it true? That, my friend, is no way to go through life.
Hey Palmetto D Bag, I see no evidence that you are not someone who swindles the elderly with fraudulent financial schemes, so you are a swindler.
Stupid game you are playing here, genius.
This is still incorrect: “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie).”
Any evidence to the contrary on that?
Palmetto D Bag,
Good. Sometimes a little public humiliation is a good thing. Just ask Sanfraud.
Let me walk you through this with the Socratic method. What was the average top marginal tax rate under Reagan?
Ask Socrates to explain this: “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie).”
I already did. Are you unable to understand? That doesn’t mean your not a smart guy. You’re very smart guy! Well, at least you are a very creative guy. You can imagine all kinds of facts.
So, Socrates belives this: “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie)”? That’s going to dent his reputation.
I don’t recall him using profanity. Have you dug that up as well?
Palmetto D-bag,
What is it with you and your obsession with profanity, deviance, and pornography? You just can’t seem to stop talking about it. You should see someone about that. And we are still waiting for you to explain which comment that I made that you wrongly assumed was a “pornographic” reference. Call me naive, but I don’t know what you are talking about. I guess you have a much broader frame of reference in that department.
And what is it about you Republicons that you seem to be constitutionally incapable of admitting when you are wrong?
I’ll admit that this is wrong: “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie).”
Perhaps you’re right. Maybe I’ve misunderstood you. What exactly is the definition of “D-Bag”?
A douche bag. Certainly has nothing to do with pornography, as far as I know of. What kind of sick porn are you into??? That must be one creepy closet!
Can you admit that the average tax rates across Reagan’s tenure were higher than they currently are under Obama, or is that too much of a threat to your manhood?
Or would it be more palatable for you to admit that, at this point in Reagan’s tenure taxes were far higher than they are currently are under Obama?
Oh, let me guess your answer..”You’re stupid, blah blah blah. Profanity! Perversion! Pornography! Deviance! Stupid!”
And I am still waiting for your sage lesson on what these tea bag protests are about, genius. Is it about taxes? Spending? Government intrusion on people’s personal lives? Losing the election? Wanting to secede? Immigration? Health care vouchers? Freedom? Gay marriage? I honestly don’t get it.
I never said that “douche bag” was pornographic, but I certainly argue that it qualifies as profanity. Anyway, did Socrates ever call anyone that name?
I can admit that this is wrong: “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie).”
I don’t know why you keep telling us that. Perhaps ignorance and profanity go together.
Palmetto D Bag,
Well, what was it that I mentioned that you wrote reminded you of pornographic material that you are familiar with?
And I am still waiting for your sage lesson on what these tea bag protests are about, genius. Is it about taxes? Spending? Government intrusion on people’s personal lives? Losing the election? Wanting to secede? Immigration? Health care vouchers? Freedom? Gay marriage?
Palmetto D,
“did Socrates ever call anyone that name?”
Well, Jack, I doubt they had douche bags back then, so my guess is no. You are the genius here. Fill me in, Jack!
Since you’re no longer arguing that, “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie),” then I suppose we’re done here.
Palmetto D Bag,
You really are a coward. And that’s being generous.
I am still waiting for your sage lesson on what these tea bag protests are about, genius. Is it about taxes? Spending? Government intrusion on people’s personal lives? Losing the election? Wanting to secede? Immigration? Health care vouchers? Freedom? Gay marriage?
Well, I’m glad we’ve agreed that “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie)” is false.
The tea party protests are, according to the organizers, about:
“A Congress and a president who:
- vote for a $500 billion tax bill without even reading it?
- are spending trillions of borrowed dollars, leaving a debt our great-grandchildren will be paying?
- consistently give special interest groups billions of dollars in earmarks to help get themselves re-elected?
- want to take your wealth and redistribute it to others?
- punish those who practice responsible financial behavior and reward those who do not?
- admit to using the financial hurt of millions as an opportunity to push their political agenda?
- run up trillions of dollars of debt and then sell that debt to countries such as China?
- want government controlled health care?
- want to take away the right to vote with a secret ballot in union elections?
- refuse to stop the flow of millions of illegal immigrants into our country?
- appoint a defender of child pornography to the Number 2 position in the Justice Department?
- want to force doctors and other medical workers to perform abortions against their will?
- want to impose a carbon tax on your electricity, gas and home heating fuels?
- want to reduce your tax deductibility for charitable gifts?
- take money from your family budget to pay for their federal budget?”
You can read all about it at:
http://www.teapartyday.com/
Palmetto D Bag,
You are hilarious!! You even make declarative statement in the form of questions! You are witty!
Wow, your agenda is so fantastically rediculous, all I can say is, you go, y’all. You are truly awesome.
I haven’t made any declarative statements in the form of a question.
Nonetheless, I’m glad that we’ve agreed that “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie)” is false.
Palmetto D Bag
“Nonetheless, I’m glad that we’ve agreed that “taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Reagan (friggin’ commie)” is false.”
Whatever, I’ll let the thread speak for itself, tool.
What do you think your constituents are going to think about the fact that you want to abolish the Military Health System and Medicare?
[...] TEA Party Friday 07.10.09 @ 6:30pm organizer Jonathon Hill « Sen … [...]