The Constitution pretends to give to Congress the right to tax.....

[rogerver]

https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/66 ... 04?lang=en

[Possum577]

I guess I agree with your tweet (which is different from the title of this thread), that the Founders of the Constitution didn't have the authority to levy taxes...because they weren't members of Congress.

So what's the satire or point you're trying to make? Because The US Constitution, section 8 clearly states:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte ... cript.html

[rogerver]

I was trying to point out that the constitution was written by people who didn't have the right to do any of the things "authorized" by the constitution.
Just because they wrote words down on paper, and called it a constitution doesn't mean that those rights suddenly came into existence.
So the question is, where did that "authority" come from, if none of the constitution creators had it to begin with?
I think the answer is that they just made it all up, and therefor it is all invalid.

I love the way this video lays it all out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngpsJKQR_ZE

If someone has a different theory, I would love to hear it.

[creationlayer]

It's a solid theory in the sense that from the beginning of man kind, each man was essentially an animal, and free to come and go as they please. Yet animals use social systems, to decide various benefits. Can we remove competitiveness from society, and humble everyone to realize we are on an even level, I don't know. It's a clear statement, but what do we do next?

Similar to wolves, we began to form into packs, or groups with something similar to an Alpha. Alpha generally were the strongest and could win battles, making others subservient. As human social systems evolved we see the rise of ideas like religion, where the ultimate authority is said to be an outside force. The organizations of these religion used their divinity interacting with the supernatural as means to enforce their power.

In addition tribes, and groups had various advantages of resource, and began to trade, creating early currency systems, sometimes shells or simple barter. The alphas, and spiritual leaders demanded payment for their needs, and often justified it as needed for the common good by creating taxation and regulation between societies.

Flash forward to today, and we see similar Alphas, governments and organizations of power generally enforcing their rule with force. At the bottom line that force is what makes individuals have to participate in the system. As it's generally said or defined, taxes collected are supposed to be for the common good of society. Once filtered through all the bureaucracy much less goes towards helping others.

Still I believe it's a positive thing for the world, to band together and help others. Some people would refuse always to give to the common good, and help with health care, food, clothing, and other needs. My biggest issue is that how do we define common good, and how can we force the government or a free society to spend funds appropriately. Once again the word force comes up, in a perfect society individuals would help where it's needed. It is the guise of common good that I believe keeps most individuals complacent with the current systems.

No, no person can just write on a piece of paper that they have the ordained right to rule over others. It is the Alpha scenario: the person with the most force inevitably achieves that bonus for winning the battle. It goes all the way down to how animals organize and share food, we are a lot more similar to the founding of humanity and animals in general then we believe. Maybe culturally and intellectually we can overcome these basic instincts.

[Possum577]

I was trying to point out that the constitution was written by people who didn't have the right to do any of the things "authorized" by the constitution.
Just because they wrote words down on paper, and called it a constitution doesn't mean that those rights suddenly came into existence.
So the question is, where did that "authority" come from, if none of the constitution creators had it to begin with?
I think the answer is that they just made it all up, and therefor it is all invalid.

Ahh, this makes more sense, thanks for the clarification.

I can't offer an expert opinion but I think the "authority" lies largely in the fact that a group of people accepted the Constitution, and its words, as a law of the land...that popular belief makes it valid. Much like the belief that the US Dollar (or any paper currency not back by gold) has value is only so due to popular and shared belief.

And of course the formal ratification of the Constitution made the document legally binding, but obviously that came well after it was written. Once this happened it was made valid.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-hist ... n-ratified

All great political documents have to start with a thought and proposal that is then laid out in a first draft, no?

[rogerver]

I suppose I would argue that popular belief alone, doesn't make anything valid.

Some examples are: popular belief in religions, or popular belief that the world was flat, or that witches needed to be burned at the stake, or that black slavery was how the world should work. Even though all of those things were popularly believed, just like the U.S. constitution today, none of those things were real, or true, just like the constitution.

[btc]

the IRS is a sham, and now they can take away your passport if you owe them too much money! what a time to live in the land of the free