« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Direct Tax and the States

By: tedpomeroy (Diary)  |  June 29th, 2012 at 10:08 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

A Direct Tax is to be apportioned among the States according to their population.  If the “Robert’s Rules of Taxes” now permits a conditional provision, being insured vs. no insurance;  then I would hope we can return to how our Republic was supposed to work, meaning your State is to take care of these matters.

So let us bring it on:  End the Federal Medicaid mandate, End Medicare and move health insurance out of employment.  Let the States solve the problem or collect the “Roberts Tax”.

The Federal Government’s proper role in this would be to see that a resident of say, West Virginia does not end up in a say, Alabama hospital without sufficient pay schedules to cover regular and customary charges.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • keepcoolwithcoolidge

    shouldn’t it be called the regressive obamacare tax. Sounds worse.

  • tedpomeroy

    When the Constitution was ratified, the newly formed Federal Government was to pass a budget. Then they were to send a letter to each State stating how much money they were to collect from its citizens apportioned to their respective populations. This was the Direct Tax.

    What happened was they went to the other option of the Excise Taxes and the easiest target was alchohol.

    Robert’s decision does a very light and sloppy take on the Obama tax and called it an indirect tax along the lines of the 16th Amendment (Income Tax) which is wrong.

    Should this “tax” survive beyond February 1, 2013, I hope we can explore having the House Ways and Means follow the original language and have the States collect it without the IRS. This would also “shake up” the 50% of Americans who pay no Federal Income tax, so they can see that there is no Santa Claus in the Beltway.