Lemniscate Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 The 14 Ammendment to the United States Contitution is the right to due process.[spoiler=14th Ammendment Full Text] "Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. How far does this Ammendment stretch?Does it go so far as to render Progressive Taxes illegal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMGAKITTY Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Well, since we have a progressive tax right now, I'm going to go ahead and say....no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemniscate Posted February 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 In a 1917 court case, corporations were ruled to be the same as private citizens, so wouldn't having taxes that are different for those 2 groups be a violation of this ammendment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holy Babylon Posted February 9, 2009 Report Share Posted February 9, 2009 No, not when they give the government more of their profits, the government thinks increasing taxes will make them richer, when in all reality it's all going back to the company through all these retarded bailouts regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemniscate Posted February 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 I am discussing IDEAL economic times.Bailouts were not government policy until recently. I would like to turn everyone to the Laffer Curve, which states that at a certain level of taxation, the amount of revenue brought in begins to decline, because it becomes more profitable for the consumer to not work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMGAKITTY Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 The Laffer curve was proven invalid, wasn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemniscate Posted February 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Prove that it is invalid. In 1921, the Secretary of the Treasury lowered the income tax rate for the top tax bracket from 73% to 24%, over the next 8 years, personal income tax reciepts rose from $719 Million to over 1 Billion. That's the Laffer curve at work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.