Author Topic: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR  (Read 9042 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: The fair share balanced budget amendment
« Reply #75 on: February 06, 2018, 08:41:48 pm »





With regard to Mark Levin's liberty amendments, and in particular his amendment dealing with taxation and balancing the annual federal budget, his amendment would make it constitutional for congress to not balance the annual budget.  Having said that, our founders intended if Congress could not finance its constitutionally authorized functions from imposts, duties and miscellaneous internal excise taxes and an emergency arose, the deficiency would be met by laying and collecting an apportioned tax among the states for the amount needed.  The formula being:


  States’ population

---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE'S CONSTITUTIONALLY AUTHORIZED FAIR SHARE

Total U.S. Population

JWK



"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides, that such protection was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"
___ Justice Story



You keep claiming Levin's amendment will do certain things that aren't conservative...yet you have failed so far to show how specifically it does that which is (according to you) not Conservative.

Now you're just getting repetitive and boring.  BTW...how popular was your Progressive Liberal interpretation of taxiation in America when you proposed it at the Hannity Forum?  Is that why you've had so many negative reports and been banned from other forums John?  Because of your trollish ways?

We already have a Liberal here pretending to be Conservative.  We don't need another.


BTW what is your take on fringe on a flag in an American courtroom?  Do you think the military as it presently stands is legal?

Your insulting remarks are not appreciated, nor do they add to a productive discussion!


What I have actually claimed is, Mark Levin's ". . . amendment would make it constitutional for congress to not balance the annual budget."
The two sections of Mark’s balanced budget amendment making it constitutional for Congress to not balance the annual budget are:
 
 
SECTION 6: Congress may provide for a one-year suspension of one or more of the preceding sections in this Article by a three-fifths vote of both Houses of Congress, provided the vote is conducted by roll call and sets forth the specific excess of outlays over receipts or outlays over 17.5 percent of the Nation’s gross domestic product.
 
SECTION 7: The limit on the debt of the United States held by the public shall not be increased unless three-fifths of both Houses of Congress shall provide for such an increase by roll call vote.

The two above sections are essentially the same crap which Republican Swamp Creatures were promoting in the mid-1980s as being part of a balanced budget amendment, a proposal which would make it constitutional for Congress to not balance the annual budget.
 
 
Now, let us take a look at the “fair share balanced budget amendment” which actually provides a method to balance the annual budget using an apportioned tax, as our Founders intended!
 
 
The Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment
 
Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
 
 
“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money
 
 
NOTE: these words would return us to our Constitution’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as our Founders intended it to operate! And, they would remove the existing chains of income taxation which now oppresses America's free enterprise system and robs the wealth which America’s productive Citizens and business owners have created.
 
"SECTION 2. Congress ought not raise money by borrowing, but when the money arising from imposts duties and excise taxes are insufficient to meet the public exigencies, and Congress has raised money by borrowing during the course of a fiscal year, Congress shall then lay a direct tax among the States at the beginning of the next fiscal year for an amount sufficient to extinguish the preceding fiscal year's deficit, and apply the revenue so raised to extinguishing said deficit."
 
 
NOTE: Congress is to raise its primary revenue from imposts and duties, [taxes at our water’s edge], and may also lay miscellaneous internal excise taxes on specifically chosen articles of consumption. But if Congress borrows and spends more than is brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes during the course of a fiscal year, then, and only then, is the apportioned tax to be laid to make up the deficiency.
 
"SECTION 3. When Congress is required to lay a direct tax in accordance with Section 1 of this Article, the Secretary of the United States Treasury shall, in a timely manner, calculate each State's apportioned share of the total sum being raised agreeably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution and then provide the various State Congressional Delegations with a bill notifying their State’s Executive and Legislature of its share of the total tax being collected, a final date by which said tax shall be paid into the United States Treasury, and interest penalties for failure to pay said tax"
 
 
NOTE: our founder’s fair share formula to extinguish a deficit may be summarized as follows:
 
 
States’ population
 
_________________ X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S FAIR SHARE
 
Total U.S. Population
 
 
This formula, as intended by our founding fathers, is to insure that each State’s share of the tax is proportionately equal to its representation in Congress, i.e., representation with a proportional financial obligation, or, one man one vote and one vote one dollar!
 
 
"SECTION 4. Each State shall be free to assume and pay its quota of the direct tax into the United States Treasury by a final date set by Congress, but if any State shall refuse or neglect to pay its quota, then Congress shall send forth its officers to assess and levy such State's proportion against the real property within the State with interest thereon at the rate of ((?)) per cent per annum, and against the individual owners of the taxable property. Provision shall be made for a 15% discount for those States paying their share by ((?))of the fiscal year in which the tax is laid, and a 10% discount for States paying by the final date set by Congress, such discount being to defray the States' cost of collection."
 
 
NOTE: This section respects the Tenth Amendment and allows each state to raise its share in its own chosen way in a time period set by Congress, but also allows the federal government to enter a state and collect the tax if a State is delinquent in meeting its obligation.
 
 
 
"SECTION 5. This Amendment to the Constitution, if ratified by the required number of States, shall take effect no later than one year after the required number of States have approved it.
 
 
JWK
 
“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”, no longer in print.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 08:44:32 pm by johnwk »

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #76 on: February 06, 2018, 08:42:58 pm »
How's your BP?  lol   :cool:

It's amazing how idiocy can raise it.   9999hair out0000

Offline WingNot

  • Resident TBR Curmudgeon
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,659
  • Gender: Male
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #77 on: February 06, 2018, 08:45:34 pm »
It's amazing how idiocy can raise it.   9999hair out0000

 :beer:
"I'm a man, but I changed, because I had to. Oh well."

Offline Frank Cannon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26,097
  • Gender: Male
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #78 on: February 06, 2018, 08:48:33 pm »
And there is a reason for reviving it as previously explained.

JWK

There is. We need to celebrate its birthday.....


Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #79 on: February 06, 2018, 08:50:26 pm »
How's your BP?  lol   :cool:

Not even slightly elevated.  His ilk don't bother me...except for the fallacies they try to push as being what the FF's had in mind when the Constitution and their words in the Federalist Papers say otherwise. 

I also take exception to people that take bits and pieces of a larger phrase or paragraph to try and say "see! I was right!"  It's lying by omission. Like when he talked about the 1798 direct tax and failed to say why it was implemented...and what was one of the consequences of what Congress did.

And I refuse to let it stand unchallenged.

The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline Frank Cannon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26,097
  • Gender: Male
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #80 on: February 06, 2018, 08:53:38 pm »
How's your BP?  lol   :cool:

Not bad. It took a hit this month but it seems to be crawling back up over $40 a share.


Offline WingNot

  • Resident TBR Curmudgeon
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,659
  • Gender: Male
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #81 on: February 06, 2018, 08:59:14 pm »
Not bad. It took a hit this month but it seems to be crawling back up over $40 a share.



Oy Vey. 
"I'm a man, but I changed, because I had to. Oh well."

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: The fair share balanced budget amendment
« Reply #82 on: February 06, 2018, 09:02:35 pm »



You keep claiming Levin's amendment will do certain things that aren't conservative...yet you have failed so far to show how specifically it does that which is (according to you) not Conservative.

Now you're just getting repetitive and boring.  BTW...how popular was your Progressive Liberal interpretation of taxiation in America when you proposed it at the Hannity Forum?  Is that why you've had so many negative reports and been banned from other forums John?  Because of your trollish ways?

We already have a Liberal here pretending to be Conservative.  We don't need another.


BTW what is your take on fringe on a flag in an American courtroom?  Do you think the military as it presently stands is legal?


Your insulting remarks are not appreciated, nor do they add to a productive discussion!


What I have actually claimed is, Mark Levin's ". . . amendment would make it constitutional for congress to not balance the annual budget."
The two sections of Mark’s balanced budget amendment making it constitutional for Congress to not balance the annual budget are:
 
 
SECTION 6: Congress may provide for a one-year suspension of one or more of the preceding sections in this Article by a three-fifths vote of both Houses of Congress, provided the vote is conducted by roll call and sets forth the specific excess of outlays over receipts or outlays over 17.5 percent of the Nation’s gross domestic product.
 
SECTION 7: The limit on the debt of the United States held by the public shall not be increased unless three-fifths of both Houses of Congress shall provide for such an increase by roll call vote.

The two above sections are essentially the same crap which Republican Swamp Creatures were promoting in the mid-1980s as being part of a balanced budget amendment, a proposal which would make it constitutional for Congress to not balance the annual budget.
 
 
Now, let us take a look at the “fair share balanced budget amendment” which actually provides a method to balance the annual budget using an apportioned tax, as our Founders intended!
 
 
The Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment
 
Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
 
 
“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money
 
 
NOTE: these words would return us to our Constitution’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as our Founders intended it to operate! And, they would remove the existing chains of income taxation which now oppresses America's free enterprise system and robs the wealth which America’s productive Citizens and business owners have created.
 
"SECTION 2. Congress ought not raise money by borrowing, but when the money arising from imposts duties and excise taxes are insufficient to meet the public exigencies, and Congress has raised money by borrowing during the course of a fiscal year, Congress shall then lay a direct tax among the States at the beginning of the next fiscal year for an amount sufficient to extinguish the preceding fiscal year's deficit, and apply the revenue so raised to extinguishing said deficit."
 
 
NOTE: Congress is to raise its primary revenue from imposts and duties, [taxes at our water’s edge], and may also lay miscellaneous internal excise taxes on specifically chosen articles of consumption. But if Congress borrows and spends more than is brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes during the course of a fiscal year, then, and only then, is the apportioned tax to be laid to make up the deficiency.
 
"SECTION 3. When Congress is required to lay a direct tax in accordance with Section 1 of this Article, the Secretary of the United States Treasury shall, in a timely manner, calculate each State's apportioned share of the total sum being raised agreeably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution and then provide the various State Congressional Delegations with a bill notifying their State’s Executive and Legislature of its share of the total tax being collected, a final date by which said tax shall be paid into the United States Treasury, and interest penalties for failure to pay said tax"
 
 
NOTE: our founder’s fair share formula to extinguish a deficit may be summarized as follows:
 
 
States’ population
 
_________________ X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S FAIR SHARE
 
Total U.S. Population
 
 
This formula, as intended by our founding fathers, is to insure that each State’s share of the tax is proportionately equal to its representation in Congress, i.e., representation with a proportional financial obligation, or, one man one vote and one vote one dollar!
 
 
"SECTION 4. Each State shall be free to assume and pay its quota of the direct tax into the United States Treasury by a final date set by Congress, but if any State shall refuse or neglect to pay its quota, then Congress shall send forth its officers to assess and levy such State's proportion against the real property within the State with interest thereon at the rate of ((?)) per cent per annum, and against the individual owners of the taxable property. Provision shall be made for a 15% discount for those States paying their share by ((?))of the fiscal year in which the tax is laid, and a 10% discount for States paying by the final date set by Congress, such discount being to defray the States' cost of collection."
 
 
NOTE: This section respects the Tenth Amendment and allows each state to raise its share in its own chosen way in a time period set by Congress, but also allows the federal government to enter a state and collect the tax if a State is delinquent in meeting its obligation.
 
 
 
"SECTION 5. This Amendment to the Constitution, if ratified by the required number of States, shall take effect no later than one year after the required number of States have approved it.
 
 
JWK
 
“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”, no longer in print.


I could care less about what you think of my criticism of your reading skills or lack there of or whether you take umbrage to my comments on your silly use of eyeroll emoji's to replace an attempt at an intelligent reply.

Everything you cite that Congress has the power to do...they aren't doing.  They refuse to do it the way it's been laid out in the Constitution.

They have the 3/5's power but with Omnibus budgets and the fact that over the last 9 years now they have absolutely refused to even write a budget much less pass one shows they have no interest in using the powers they are Constitutionally granted...that we the people...the states have to bring them to heel and abide by the law.

That in our Representative Republic is done via Amendment.  And thanks to George Mason he gave the people a way to amend the Constitution when Congress either wouldn't or couldn't for whatever reason....the Article V convention of states.

If the Congress refuses to abide by the 3/5th's rule when they arbitrarily raise the debt ceiling or unfairly make 50% of wage earners pay 90% of the taxes while 47% pay nothing....then the states have to act.  That's what the Liberty Amendments do.

What they do NOT do is take any power away from Congress.  It doesn't take away anything they are Constitutionally obligated to do...it does the opposite...it reinforces and puts a finer point on what they are to do and how they are to do it.

But you are seriously mistaken and again your thinking as we've already seen is gravely flawed if you think anything proposed in the Liberty Amendments...to include your issues with the balanced budget amendment takes anything away from Congress.

If it did...you'd be as detailed in your explanation of that as you've been in pimping your ginned up tax "fair share" tax scam over and over again.

But you just keep cutting and pasting the same old stuff.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 09:03:28 pm by txradioguy »
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #83 on: February 06, 2018, 09:07:26 pm »
The ONLY place our n00b's rantings have gotten any traction is in the discussion forums at the Baltimore Sun...back in 2011.


He thinks anyone that supports the BBA in Levins books is a phony...to include Jim DeMint and Rand Paul.

Go figure.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #84 on: February 06, 2018, 09:07:43 pm »
Not even slightly elevated.  His ilk don't bother me...except for the fallacies they try to push as being what the FF's had in mind when the Constitution and their words in the Federalist Papers say otherwise. 

I also take exception to people that take bits and pieces of a larger phrase or paragraph to try and say "see! I was right!"  It's lying by omission. Like when he talked about the 1798 direct tax and failed to say why it was implemented...and what was one of the consequences of what Congress did.

And I refuse to let it stand unchallenged.


Well then, offer a rebuttal to what I have posted if you disagree.  Quote my words and offer your rebuttal.  All you have done to this point in time is post insulting remarks and avoid addressing my answers to what you have written.


JWK

 

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: The fair share balanced budget amendment
« Reply #85 on: February 06, 2018, 09:09:51 pm »

I could care less about what you think of my criticism of your reading skills or lack there of or whether you take umbrage to my comments on your silly use of eyeroll emoji's to replace an attempt at an intelligent reply.


 *****rollingeyes*****

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #86 on: February 06, 2018, 09:09:57 pm »

Well then, offer a rebuttal to what I have posted if you disagree.  Quote my words and offer your rebuttal.  All you have done to this point in time is post insulting remarks and avoid addressing my answers to what you have written.


JWK

I have posted lengthy informed rebuttals and you just keep posing the same crap John.  You ignore cherry pick and don't provide context to your historical dates or snippets of legislation.

Wash...rinse...repeat.

The Libs on the Baltimore Sun discussion forums might like what you're saying...but have you noticed no one following this discussion is following you?

The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #87 on: February 06, 2018, 09:13:58 pm »
I have posted lengthy informed rebuttals and you just keep posing the same crap John.  You ignore cherry pick and don't provide context to your historical dates or snippets of legislation.

Wash...rinse...repeat.

The Libs on the Baltimore Sun discussion forums might like what you're saying...but have you noticed no one following this discussion is following you?

 *****rollingeyes*****



Offline WingNot

  • Resident TBR Curmudgeon
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,659
  • Gender: Male
"I'm a man, but I changed, because I had to. Oh well."

Offline Free Vulcan

  • Technical
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,730
  • Gender: Male
  • Ah, the air is so much fresher here...
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #89 on: February 06, 2018, 09:28:43 pm »
Free Republic? What the hell is that? Is that that site run by that Grifter Jim guy?
The Republic is lost.

Offline Frank Cannon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26,097
  • Gender: Male
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #90 on: February 06, 2018, 09:56:59 pm »
*****rollingeyes*****

I hear ya pal. I also know that Mark Levin was intricately involved in the murder plot of Archduke Ferdinand, invented the color beige and introduced crack cocaine to the ghetto. He is a very bad man.

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #91 on: February 06, 2018, 10:02:55 pm »
I hear ya pal. I also know that Mark Levin was intricately involved in the murder plot of Archduke Ferdinand, invented the color beige and introduced crack cocaine to the ghetto. He is a very bad man.

 *****rollingeyes*****

Offline INVAR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,961
  • Gender: Male
  • Dread To Tread
    • Sword At The Ready
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #92 on: February 07, 2018, 12:18:42 am »
I hear ya pal. I also know that Mark Levin was intricately involved in the murder plot of Archduke Ferdinand, invented the color beige and introduced crack cocaine to the ghetto. He is a very bad man.

The world is never going to recover from the introduction of beige.  Only the plague of plaid will be said to have have been worse.

It is why interior decorators and men's fashion designers from the 70's must live in shame for eternity.
Fart for freedom, fart for liberty and fart proudly.  - Benjamin Franklin

...Obsta principiis—Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon [the] American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour." - John Adams, February 6, 1775

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #93 on: February 07, 2018, 12:23:54 am »
The world is never going to recover from the introduction of beige.  Only the plague of plaid will be said to have have been worse.

It is why interior decorators and men's fashion designers from the 70's must live in shame for eternity.

I totally agree, Invar.  Beige - blech!

Offline Mod1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,654
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #94 on: February 07, 2018, 12:58:26 am »
I think it's fair to note this thread is boring the crap out of me.  I really hate boring threads.

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #95 on: February 07, 2018, 01:53:31 am »
I think it's fair to note this thread is boring the crap out of me.  I really hate boring threads.

I agree with you.  I thought I could generate a productive discussion about Mark Levin's liberty amendments.  Unfortunately, it appears  the majority of participants prefer to engage in personal attacks rather than discuss what Mark Levin has proposed. 

JWK

“Liberals do a great deal of talking about hearing other points of view, [but] it sometimes shocks them to learn that there are other points of view,” William F. Buckley
 

Offline WingNot

  • Resident TBR Curmudgeon
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,659
  • Gender: Male
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #96 on: February 07, 2018, 02:17:58 am »
I agree with you.  I thought I could generate a productive discussion about Mark Levin's liberty amendments.  Unfortunately, it appears  the majority of participants prefer to engage in personal attacks rather than discuss what Mark Levin has proposed. 

JWK



Nothing personal but you are just a boring SOB with the same tired old arguments.  Other than that I'm sure you are also a real bastard in real life that no one can stand to be around. 
"I'm a man, but I changed, because I had to. Oh well."

Offline johnwk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 94
Re: John W K attacks on Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments on FR
« Reply #97 on: February 07, 2018, 03:48:00 am »
Nothing personal but you are just a boring SOB with the same tired old arguments.  Other than that I'm sure you are also a real bastard in real life that no one can stand to be around.

 *****rollingeyes*****