The point of the driving one, is to use an example of an entitlement, that doesn't cost anything. To allow you to drive or not to drive does not effect me or anyone else. To give you healthcare, does.

As for the question of is all taxes unconstitutional, no. There is a cost to running the country, and we all own the country, so it's all our responsibility to maintain it.

In a perfect world (and I realize logistically this is impossibly), the US would figure out how many man hours it takes per person to run the country, and then it would collect those hours either by taking the money you earn in that time, or by allowing you to contribute those hours.

So let's say it came to 200 hours a year is what everyone needed to contribute. If you didn't want to contribute time, you just did whatever you do, and the income you earn for those 200 hours you gave. If you didn't want to give by the way of income, you worked 200 hours for the government doing road work, construction, or office work. Whatever you were good at.

This is the concept of taxes, but the problem is, 43 out of every 100 people contribute 0 hours a year, while the rest of us contribute far more then 200 hours. We are being forced to do your work for you, yet we each own the same percentage of the US.

For me, it's about 500 hours. If the 200 hour figure was correct, taking 200 hours from me is constitutional. Taking the other 300 hour so someone else doesn't have to contribute theres, is not.

To bring the above analogy around, so it can be tied into the constitution....

Liberty says my time is my time. Sure, I need to do my part in maintaining the country, but once that time is fulfilled, I am to do with my time what I wish, as long as I don't step on other peoples rights.

If everyone was contributing 200 hours a year to the country, and we all sat down and voted on something that was going to take 10 hours per person more to fund, it's unconstitutional for a leader to say "well, let's see... you people, yea you over there. You contribute 20 more hours for 220 a year, and umm... you guys over there, you just stick to your 200".

That's taking an extra 10 hours of someones time, so you don't have to take 10 from someone else. Those 10 ours are mine. The right to Liberty give me that right. But someone in office chose to take if from me, and require me to work someone else's hours.

How can you think that's right?

Are you saying that everyone should pay an equal amount per person?  This logic fails me.

I am not talking money, I am talking time. Everyone should pay the same time per year. If I make 10x what you make over the same time, I should pay 10X what you pay.

The way we do it today, is if I make 10x what you make, people think it's right to just ask me to pay 10% more, and then you don't have to pay anything. That's wrong. I don't owe any more of this country then you do, and my opinion of how to run this country does not matter any more then your does.

If along with not supplying hours to the country, you also chose to give up your say in how it's run, I guess I would have less of a problem with it. So the 43% of the people who provide no effort to keeping the country up, don't get a say in how it's run. If I have to work twice as many hours as you do in order to supply what the country thinks I should pay, my vote should count twice as much.

That's not really how I would want it to be, but at least that's fare.

The way it is today is like having three people living in a house, two pay all the bills and take care of the upkeep, and one does nothing (and has no plans to do anything). When it's time to discuss how much money to spend on replacing the front porch, do you think all three should have an equal say? I should hope you wouldn't expect the one who has no intent to pay or do the work, to have the same weight in the discussion.

If you do, where do you live? I want to move in.

?

Where did you come up with this 43% of people?  I am not doubting it I would just like to know.  I would imagine more than half of those people are disabled, retired or children.  So what happens when you get hurt or retire?  Do you expect those people should lose their right to vote etc..?   And should put their "time" in?  

I do believe that if your able to work you should work, but there are people who cannot work.  A lot of those people have severe physical and or mental disabilities, I do feel like that we as a nation should take care of this group of people.  If you think we should just get rid of them or let them starve then you would probably fit in with the Young Hitler Youth.

There will never be 100% compliance with the system.  Just for the simple fact we are all humans and some of us really just don't give a fuck and could live under a tree for all they care.  Unfortunately a lot of these people live with their hands out and this is the real problem.  It will never go away, and it has always been this way since the begining of time.  They were usually beggers and thieves.

It's actually 47%. I just low balled it because I was to lazy to look it up.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/taxes/who_pays_taxes/index.htm

They still pay state taxes, and social security, but they don't pay income tax. And I never said those people don't need to be taken care of, I just said it's not the governments job to do it. 100 years ago no one paid federal income tax, and people did not starve on the streets. We took care of each other. As government becomes all things to people, this feeling of individual responsibility towards others will continue to fade. That's not a good thing.

Oh, and being I am of Jewish, I doubt the Hitler youth would take me. Our founding fathers would however, as all I am asking out country to become, is what it was (while keeping our civil rights).

Aside from civil rights, nothing in the last 200 years has made us better.

And your starting to sound like the last guy who had no points to defend your point of view. All you do is attack me. 

To you and people like you, taking from those you feel can be taken from is OK. For me, we should take from no one.

Why does that make me the bad guy?

Dude, I am not attacking you.  I agreed that everyone should pay there way so we basically have the same idea. (The Hitler thing was uncalled for though sorry.)  I just understand that it will never go back to the old days of no income tax and everyone takes care of their neighbor.  The simple fact is without an income tax we wouldn't have an interstate system, or anything that made the 20th century worth living in such as vaccines, and medicines.   Thank god we do have it and thank god people pay it in or we would all be without electricity and running water, except for the chosen few at the top.  Sort of like Africa is right now, look it up.  Most of them don't have an income tax.  Well at least most of them don't pay one in anyway.

And I do agree we need to get back to some of the ways of the past but not having an income tax is a horrid idea.  How exactly are we supposed to pay of our national debt?  Just tell them to piss off we have nukes?  Sure we could do that and I am certain we could probably get away with it.  But the rest of the world would be in economic chaos.  I don't get where your saying I don't have anything to stand on.  I explained my examples and I am certain they made sense to most of us.  You just need to chill out and we can agree to disagree.

And by the way I'm not a left wing nut, commie, or right wing jerkoff.  I am in the center, and I believe both sides have good people in them, they are just so foolish they can't agree to get along and work together.  Luckily for the rest of the world its like this or there would be no stopping us.  In 15 years when China over takes us as the supreme economic power were all doomed.  I will only be 53 and at that point I will be probably be jobless and my savings spent.  Along with half of the rest of us americans.  The king is dead or dieing, long live the king....

Again, I am not attacking you but this is a heated subject.

Oh I am not upset in the least :). I have been having this exact same conversation on these boards for 2-3 years now.

I took your post as saying you think I want to let old, sick, and handy caped people to die. And that's just not my position.

Most people who are of that 47%, are low income working class. They have jobs, have nothing wrong with them, and work for a living. I am also not upset with them. They pay all the taxes the government requires of them. I am upset, that the number the government requires, is 0.

I also don't think we should get rid of income tax. I am just saying everyone should have a vested interest in the cost of things. for 47% of the population, they don't care what things cost, yet they get to vote on how they spend other peoples money.

And by the way, I don't blame Obama for our tax situation. I blame Congress. Congress makes the budget, not the president.